Skip to main content

Full text of "A hand-book of Hindu pantheism : The Panchadasi of Sreemut Vidyaranya Swami"

See other formats


/?/, , ,// "1C 

664 4*+- __ 









Translator, "Vedantasara," Gfc. 







[ All rights reserved. ] 


"Elysium Press" 6%\2, Beadon Street, Calcutta. 


FOR one so deservedly reputed, as the author of the~ 
PANCHADASI, which holds a high place in the realm of 
Vedantic Philosophy, it is but proper, that a short notice 
of his life and writings should go along with its English 
version. But in the matter of biography, there never was 
a time, nor is it even now the case, when any attention 
was paid to it. India boasts of a literature which is 
unique; every department of learning bears the stamp 
of genius, originality, deep research, and profound and 
sublime thoughts. Unfortunately the lives, that were 
spent in thus enriching the Sanskrit, and opening up a 
world of new ideas and new philosophies, were allowed 
to drop in time into the gulf of eternity, without 
leaving any trace of their struggles and sufferings, their 
joys and pleasures, beyond the simple fact that they 
lived and died. Suppression of self or egoism was a 
religious principle with them ; and this may to a certain 
extent account for the lack of authentic records of the 
lives of our great men and good. And, if to this be 
added the certain fact, that they lived quite unosten 
tatiously, with very slender means, barely enough to 
satisfy the simple wants of the flesh (already reduced 
to starvation limits) ; without that artificial halo, which 
encircles the mushroom authors of the day : it will be 
evident that the incident of such lives as theirs would 
neither be interesting nor profitable. We had no press 
that could puff in those days ; the art of printing was 
yet in the womb of distant futurity ; the renown of a 
scholar was confined in the narrow circle of his nativity, 


where a solitary student would be found engaged in 
receiving, and he in imparting, instruction to them. His 
pupils, gradually spread his fame and worth ; for, after 
finishing their course, they turn into new pastures, and 
set themselves up as professors. In this way, the learn 
ed scholar draws pupils from remote places, who copy 
their teachers manuscripts and writings, and, are taught 
in them. Under circumstances so repressive and trying it 
is a matter of congratulation that, what is yet left us, is 
a standing monument, imperishable like time itself, and 
undying like glory. With the paucity of materials for 
a suitable biography, so much of fiction has been trans 
planted on it that we had one time thought of giving 
up the idea ; but recollecting that a blind uncle is better 
than none, we begin our task. 

Madhava, Madhavarya, Madhvacharya, and Madha- 
vamatya were the names by which Vidyarana Swami 
used to pass prior to his turning into a recluse. He 
was born in the fourteenth century of the Christian era 
at Golconda. It appears that Vijayanagar was the 
capital of Bukkka I, whose family priest and minister 
our author was. Very little is known of his early life. 
His parents, as may naturally be expected from their 
connection with the reigning family, were in affluent 
circumstances and very highly respected. His father 
was, as he himself speaks of him in his commentary on 
Parasar s Law Book, " Narayan of good renown," and 
mother, Sreemutty. He had two more brothers, called 
Sayan (the great Commentator of the Rig Veda)* and 

* Unfortunately some Oriental scholars confound him with hii 
brother, the subject of this memoir. Both the brothers, Sayan 
and Madhav, had their separate Commentaries on the Vedas. 



Somenath. They belonged to the Bharadwaj Gotra and 
Bodhvayani Shakha of the Black Yajur Veda. He 
wrote many works, all of which attest his learning and 
erudition. Next to Sankaracharya, he is everywhere 
recognised as an authority on the doctrine of Non-du 
ality. He wrote on Medicine, Grammar, Astrology, 
besides writing Commentaries on the Four Vedas known 
by the name of Madhavaprokash\ Commentaries on 
the Brahma Mimansa or Adhikaran Mala ; Commen 
tary on Parasar s Law Book ; Anumitiprakash Brahma 
Gita, or a critical analysis of the doctrine of non-duality 
based on the Sruti, and a review of Madhava, Ramanuja 
and Sankar s views. Here also he has added his com 
mentary for elucidating the text, and called Prakashika ; 
Jwanmuktiviveka ; Drigdrishvamveka and the gloss of 
Aparokshyanuvutt. His Sarvadarshan Sangraha treats 
of fifteen systems as follow : (i) Charvaka-darshna, 
(2) Buddha-darshana; (3) Arhata-darshna ; (4) Rama- 
nuja-darshana ; (5) Puranprajna ; (6) Nakulis-pasupat ; 
(7) Shaiva; (8) Pratyabhijna ; (9) Raseshavar ; (10) 
Aulik; (11) Akshapada; (12) Jaimini ; (13) Panini ; 
(14) Sankhya; and (15) Patanjal. Among his minor 
works are Jaiminya Naymala, Acharmadhava and 
Sa n ka rdigbijaya . 

It is neither profitable nor interesting to enter 
into details about the various anecdotes current about 
Madhava s snpernatural gifts, For instance, it is said, 
that with a view of propitiating the Gayatri Devi he had 
collected several learned Brahmins from various parts 
of the country, and on the auspicious occasion regularly 
commenced the Gayatripurashcharana, but he was un 
successful in meeting her. This made him indifferent to 
worldly enjoyments, and ultimately turned him into a re- 


cluse. Then Gayatri insisted upon him to ask for a boon, 
and Madhava requested her to cause a shower of -gold in 
the Karnatic, so that every one may become rich. This 
was actually fulfilled. Later in life he settled himself in 
the Sringeri Math founded by Sankaracharya of which 
he became the reputed head. Here his last work Pancha 
dasi was written, but as he did not live long to finish 
it, the work was left to his Guru Bharatitirtha Muni, who 
wrote the latter nine books and thus completed the 
fifteen books of which the Panchadasi is made.* 

N. D. 

* And so it did happen that with this short 
Sketch of the author, the English translator of the Panchadasi 
paid his tribute of Nature. He died in his 47* year on the I 4 Ul 
of March, 1887 at 5 -3O.A. M,, deeply regretted by all who knew 
, . H. Dt 




is non-different from the Supreme Self and who is the chief 
resort for the destruction of infatuity and its attendant evils 
derived from conceit and egoity, leading to ineffable misery 
every being acting under the influence of free will, like to 
those fearful animals the dog, crocodile and others living in 

2. Love and reverence to the said GURU will produce a 
pure heart, and enable the individual to distinguish the RealJ 
from the non-real objective world together with the elements J 
of which it is made. This I proceed to consider. 

3. To establish the identity or oneness of the Everlasting 
Intelligence and Bliss PARABRAHMA with the Individuated 
Self, it is necessary that the latter must also have the same 
everlasting intelligence and bliss. With this view, the non- 
difference of knowledge as helps the individual in the cogni 
tion of several objects is being cited here. We distinguish a 


thing by its name, for instance a golden earring and a golden 
bangle are equally derived from gold, the difference in their 
shape determines their individuality. 

4. And if this be omitted, the remaining gold is one in 
both, yet each has its name. In the same way, the Individual 
Spirit is one with the Universal : the difference consists in 
their associates, which if left out, there remains only one 
consciousness. Hence the individual state being one of ever 
lasting intelligence, it is one with the Absolute. But this re 
quires proof and for such a purpose it is necessary, in the 
first instance, to establish consciousness as one and if that 
can be done, then it is eternal and true, for what is always 
one, is eternal. 

5. There are three states of consciousness (a) waking, (3) 
dreaming, and (c) dreamless slumber. The first is defined 
as that condition when consciousness takes hold of a subject 
by the instrumentality of the senses. In the conciousness of 
the wakeful state are floating sound, touch, make, taste and 
smell ether, air, fire, water and earth (* .*.,) multiform sub 
jects. What floats, is an object of cognition, subject, etc., and 
that in which it floats is consciousness. The respective con 
sciousnesses which enable us to cognise an object by touch, 
sound, etc., may appear different and multiform, but such 
difference and diversity exist only in the subject or object 
which consciousness covers while consciousness is one and 
alone ; and that difference in the subject or object is easily 
recognisable by the individual characteristics or features pre- 
sentin it. 

6. For instance, a cow and horse are different from one 
another, a pitcher is also a separate object from a cloth ; hence 
for variety, all objects are different from similar other objects 
and for oneness consciousness whether as regards sound touch, 
sight or in any other condition is non-different. In short, the 
condition which enables an individual to form an idea of an 
object by touch or sight, or by its sound, has reference to one 


and the same consciousness, and what appears to us different 
viz., sound quite distinct from touch, is due to the diversity of 
the objects. Therefore the consciousness present in the waking 
condition is one, but the subject or object of such conscious 
ness is several, and for this multiformness we are apt to 
mistake the one and impartite consciousness as several, but if 
we can shake off such difference-creating-a-mistake then 
consciousness appears as one. 

7. This intelligence is the Atma (Self) and for his being 
the receptacle of supreme felicity, he is full of bliss. If 
from extreme misery one is disgusted with his self, yet it can 
not be said that self, is not an object of love, for no one 
desires that he may be miserable, or that he may die ; on the 
contrary every one desires that he may live long, and that he 
may enjoy happiness. This proves the self to be the centre 
of affection. 

8. The affection for a son, or towards a friend is all for 
self, if it were otherwise, then we would have felt equally for 
an ascetic. But love for self is not actuated by any considera 
tion in the way as it influences our connection in regard to a 
friend for it is quite possible, and it happens so, for a rupture 
to take place with a son ; but this is neither possible nor does 
it ever occur in the case of an individual s love for self. 
Hence the principle of individuality or self is blissfulness. 

9. The individual spirit or self, having thus been shewn 
by the foregoing demonstrations to be eternal, intelligence, 
and full of bliss is expressed by the word Twam (Thou) ; the 
PARARRAHMA, Universal Spirit or Supreme Brahma as express 
ed by the word Tat (That) is eternal intelligence and bliss 
(this is self-evident.) Hence their non-difference is the object 
which is explained in the Vedanta. This will subsequently 
be pointed out. 

10. Having thus established the Atma io be full of bliss 
it remains to be seen whether or not, happiness is manifested 
always. If it is not manifested, then Self cannot be the seat of 


supreme felicity ; for unless an ojbect appear beautiful, it can 
not excite our love ; moreover, even if it is manifested, Self 
cannot be styled to be the seat of happiness, for naturally 
after having derived, happiness, there is no inclination for 
finding out its cause, hence where is the possibility of attach 
ing felicity to him ? And as after having tasted such supreme 
and ineffable happiness, there is no more hankering left 
for the gratification of worldly desires, therefore love for self 
owes its no other second principle for which it is said, 
the semblance of bliss attached to the Atma is both mani 
fested and its reverse. 

12. As in an assembly of boys recanting the Vedas the 
voice of no one boy can be singled out plainly, though it is 
audible, hence it can be said to be audible and inaudible at 
the same time, similarly for an impediment the manifestibility 
of Self being full of bliss and its opposite condition are present 
at the same time. 

13. The nature of the impediment which prevents the 
manifestibility of the supreme happiness of the Atma, though 
always present, is now being declared. That which is eter 
nally present, but which appears to be non-eternal is called 
an impediment, or obstacle. In this way, the supreme felicity 
of the Atma is ever present but from being blinded by the 
poison of worldly desires, such felicity appears to be imper 
manent and ill defined, a result of what is called an obstacle, 
which prevents its manifestibility, though it is ever present. 

14. What is the cause of obstacle? As in the foregoing 
example of an assemblage of boys, the cause of the obstacle 
which prevents the voice of a single boy being heard is the 
combining of several voices loudly recanting, so in the present 
instance the cause of the obstacle which prevents the mani 
festibility of the supreme felicity of the Atma is Avidya which 
has neither a beginning nor end and is indescribable. 

15. This Avidya owes its origin to Prakriti. Prakriti\<s, 
the shadow of the Supreme Brahma with the three attributes 


of Satwa, Raja, and Tamas, it is subtle. It is of two kinds, 
Mdya (Illusion) and Avidya (Ignorance.) 

1 6. Though equally derived from Prakriti their constitu 
tion differs; for Mdya is made of the pure Satwa. The reflec 
tion of intelligence in Mdya after having subdued it, is called 
the omniscient, Iswara (the Lord). 

17. The reflection of intelligence in Avidya and entirely 
subservient to it is called the Jiva (Life soul) ; purity or 
insentiency of Ignorance and its varying shades determine the 
constitution of a Deva, man, cow, horse, etc. It is likewise 
called the cause-body; and one having a conceit for this cause- 
body is called Prdjna. 

1 8. Now to ascertain the Astral body (linga sharira) the 
five elements require to be considered. From the aforesaid 
Prakriti (Matter) abounding in (Tamas) darkness, by the com 
mand of Iswara (Lord) were derived first ether, next air, fire, 
water and earth for the enjoyment of Prdjna and others. 

19. [Prakriti] Matter has been shown to possess the 
three properties, Satwa, Raja, Tamas, hence the elements 
which are derived from it, must also have them in common 
for [the qualities of a cause-body are transmitted to its pro. 
ducts.] From the satwavic particle of each of the five elements 
are derived in a consecutive order the several senses viz., from 
the good particles of ether, the ear, from air, the skin, from 
fire, eye, from water, tongue, and from earth, nose. 

20. From the collective totality of goodness of the five 
elements is derived the internal organ (antakarana) which for 
a difference of its formation is divided into Manas (Mind) and 
Booddhi (Intellect) the first is characterised by doubts and the 
second by certitude. 

21. From the intermediate meddlesome or active (Raja) 
quality present in each of the five elements, are derived in a 
serial order, speech and the five organs of action. That is to 
say ether is the cause of the organ of speech, air the hands, 
fire the feet, water the anus, and earth the genitals. 


22. The collective totality of the same Raja as present in 
all the five elements is the progenitor of Prdna (vital air) which 
for a variety of function is divided into 

(a,) Prana the air situated at the tip of the nose. 

(b) Apana the air residing in the anus. 

(c) Samana which helps the digestion of food. 

(d) *Udana situated in the throat. 

(e) Vyana which resides in all parts of the body. 

23. The five senses, five organs of action, five vital airs, 
the mind and intellect constitute the seventeen character- 
isticts of the subtle body otherwise called Linga sharira. 
Hence to determine it, the foregoing explanation concerning 
the origin of ether, etc., was necessary. 

24. Prajna associated with the impure goodness abound 
ing in ignorance, for the conceit that he is the subtle Astral 
body is called Taijas ; and Iswara associated with the pure 
goodness abounding in illusion for a similar conceit is called 
Hiranyagarbha. Here the conceit in the subtle body being 
identical in both, their actual difference consists in this : that 
Tat/as is the distribute segregate, and Iswara collective totality 
of all Astral bodies. That is to say Iswara or Lord has conceit 
that he is the collective totality of all Astral bodies while 
Taijas has a conceit for his individual subtle body only. 

25. This Hiranyagarbha knows that he is non-different 
and inseparable from all collective subtle bodies with which 
he is associated. Hence he is called a collective totality. In 
the same way from want of knowledge Taijas is a distributive 

26. Having thus dealt with the subtle Astral body and 
its associates Taijas, Prajna and Hiranyagarbha and Iswara, 
the origin of the gross physical body is now being considered. 
With this object quintuplication is to be explained. Iswara 
with a view of providing adequate food and drink for Prajna 
and other beings and their place of enjoyment, and for the 
production of the four varieties of gross bodies, viviparous, 

- - T 7 "T Vc \ I -T S f? 

- (xt* * * ft 


oviparous, earthy and germinating, divided each of the five 
elements, ether and the rest, in the following wise : 

27. He divided each element into two equal parts, took 
the first half of each, divided it into four parts, and added to 
it, (one eighth), each first portion of the other elements. 

28. From this quintuplication of the elements has been 
produced the Brahma s egg, and the fourteen abodes from 
Bhur to Fatal etc., together with all the enjoyable things and 
the necessary bodies capable of enjoying them.* Hiranya- 
garbha for the conceit that he is present universally in the col 
lective totality of all gross physical bodies is called Vaiswanara, 
or Virat [for he manifests in divers forms] Taijas for its pre 
sence in the distributive segregate of individual gross physical 
body and for the conceit that he is a Deva, man, cow, horse, 
etc., is designated Viswa. 

29. Now the unspiritual and (ignorant) of these Devas and 
men for enjoying happiness and suffering woe, in this state of 
existence have recourse to actions which again lead to future 
re-births for similar enjoyment and suffering in proportion 
to their merits and de-merits. Thus being hurled into con 
tinual re-births, they are debarred from ever enjoying true 

30. As in the instance of an insect falling into a whirlpool, 
pass from one whirlpool to another in an attempt to extricate 
itself, failing which it is prevented from attaining to happiness. 

31. As the same insect for previous good actions from 
the kind hearted interference of an individual is rescued from 

* " From the said fractional combinations of the elements have 
likewise been evolved, one .above the other, the several abodes 
designated as Bhur, Bhuvar, Swar, Mahar, Janas, Tapas and 
Satya ; and one below the other, the nether spheres, severally called 
Atala, Vitala/Sutala, Rasatala, Talatala, Mahatala, and Patala, 
together with Brahma s egg, the four physical (gross) bodies with 
their adequate food-grains and drink." Vide DHOLE S Vedanta- 
sara, p. 25. 


the whirlpool and deposited under the shade of a tree on the 
river bank to enjoy happiness. 

32. So these ignorant and unspiritually inclined Devas 
and men for previous good actions of a prior existence, having 
received instruction from a teacher, devoted to Brahma, come 
to differentiate the Atma from the five sheaths Annamaya, etc., 
and attain to supreme felicity (* .<?.,) emancipation. 

33. What are the five sheaths? They are the Annamaya, 
Pranamaya, Manomaya and Anandamaya. They cover the 
Atma like a sheath, hence they are designated kosha (sheaths). 
As the silk-worm after having w r oven its sac becomes confined 
and is subjected to much inconvenience, so these five-sheaths 
cover the Atma, render him forgetful ef his real nature and 
hurl him into a relationship with the external world. 

34. Now for an examination of these sheaths. The result 
ing product of quintuplication of the elements is the physical 
body. This is designated the Annamayakosh or the foodful 
covering. The subtle Astral body having within it the five 
organs of action developed from the active Raja, together 
with five vital airs constitute what is called the Life-sheath 

35. The five organs of sense (eye, hearing, etc.,) the re 
sulting product of the satwavic quality with the Mind (Manas) 
which is full of doubts represent the mental sheath. But in 
connection with the Spiritual Intelligence the faculty of 
certitude (Booddhi) the five senses form the cognitional 

36. Ignorance (Avidya) which has been described as the 
cause-body has a particle of satwavic or good quality, which is 
impure; this with its inherent tendency for delights, pleasures, 
love and affection, etc., is termed the (Anandamayakosh) 
Blissful sheath ; in other words the Atma for his conceit in 
each of these five sheaths receives a separate appellation, 
that is to say in connection with food, foodful; life sheath, 
vital ; with knowledge, cognitional ; and bliss, blissful. 


37. The Supreme A/ma is to be differentiated from the 
five sheaths for which He has a predilection or conceit by the 
methods of Anvaya and Vyatireka. If by the discriminating 
powers of intelligence, one s own Alma be disintegrated or 
separated and rendered distinct from the five sheaths, then is 
discovered his condicion of everlasting intelligence and bliss, 
consequently the condition of the finite as represented by th* 
Jiva is annihilated and he merges into the indication o 
Brahma, with which he is one. 

38. In the dreaming state, consciousness belonging to 
the gross physical body the receptacle of food (hence 
foodful) is absent, but the Atma is not wanting in manifestibi- 
lity. He is present as a witness even here and such a con 
dition is termed Anvaya or connection as cause and effect. 
[The oft quoted example of " I knew nothing then" is a trite 
example. Here the phrase signifies that all consciousness 
is at an end, but then the knowledge of such a condition is 
itself an experience of a certain amount of consciousness, 
otherwise for one to say on waking that he knew nothing while 
asleep will be impossible. Now this signifies that the mind 
in its ordinary state is a double combination of Atma plus 
mind, we are so in rich in the enjoyment of this twin medley, 
that its least disturbance as in fits, or trance where the mind 
sleeps, or in the dreaming condition when the mind ceases to 
receive the reflection of the Atma^lull of intelligence, we 
say we know nothing, here the literal condition of the Alma 
continues as active as ever, it is only the mind that is cut off 
from the influence of receiving the reflected intelligence which 
is its habitual wont. The Atma is a witness of what the mind 
fails to perceive and such a condition is what is meant by the 
term just used,] while that other condition in which the active 
manifestibility of the Alma continues in the absence of con 
sciousness in the gross physical body [i. e,, the consciousness 
of the gross body disappears in spite of the presence of Self] 
Js called Vyatireka or dissimilitude. By these two methods 


the A/ma is clearly discernible to be quite a separate thing 
from the gross physical body, the foodful sheath. 

39. Carrying the same argument to the next stage, 77*2., 
that of dreamless slumber the duality of Self and the subtle 
Astral body will be clearly established. To be more explicit, 
we have seen that the A/ma is full of manifestibility and is 
ever so, now in the dreamless slumbering condition, the sub 
tle Astral body is wanting in consciousness, such would not 
happen if it were the Atma, for the consciousness of Self 
never ceases so long as life lasts, hence they are twain. 
Therefore the two methods are simply a process of analysis. 
The first refers to the A/ma, the second to the body. As in 
the first case, so here too, when with the absence of consci 
ousness in the subtle Astral body, the consciousness [of Self] 
is not in any way affected it is his Anvaya ; and when with 
the illuminating powers of Self, the subtle Astral body loses 
all consciousness concerning itself, it is its Vyatireka. 

40. Thus therefore while the discussion of the five sheaths 
clearly establishes their difference from the principle Self, the 
introduction of the consideration of the subtle Astral body is 
done on purpose, for if the Atma is a distinct entity from the 
same Astral body, then it follows that the Pranamaya, Mano- 
maya and the Vijnanmaya sheaths are also quite distinct and 
separate. For these sheaths are non-different from the Astral 
body, from which they differ only in composition and quality, 
in the constituent elements of the Sa/wa, Raja and Tama 
qualities inherent in them, for which they have each a sepa 
rate name. 

41. Now are to be explained for the purpose of ascertain 
ing the non-identity of the cause-body with the Spirit, its 
Anvaya and Vyatrieka in the state of the profound meditation 
(Samadhi) , for such a consideration the blissful sheath or the 
cause-body, though it shakes of its coil of ignorance, yet the 
tangibility of the Spirit as a witness is of the first, while the 


continuance of ignorance, notwithstanding the presence of the 
Spirit, is an instance of the second. 

42. By the aforesaid two methods of analysis the differen 
tiation of the Spirit from the five sheaths and its attainment of 
the PARABRAHMA is thus established, as in the plant saccharum 
munja the tender and new fibres covered by the firmer covering 
of older fibres can plainly be separated mentally by argument 
and reasoning, so by analysis and synthesis if the Spirit be 
disintegrated from its five sheaths or coverings, it attains the 
everlasting blissfulness and truth of the Supreme Brahma, from 
which it has not even the semblance of dissimilarity. 

43. Now this non-duality of the individual Spirit and 
the Supreme Brahma is indicated by the transcendental phrase 
(Tat Twam Ast) That art thou. Here if the associates be 
left out according to the canons of Rhetoric, of abandoning 
a part, That refers to Parabrahma consciousness asso 
ciated with illusion (Maya) while Thou refers to the indi 
vidual consciousness associated with ignorance, if the asso 
ciates, viz., illusion and ignorance, be abandoned, there 
remains only consciousness. This is indicated. 

44. As a phrase cannot be comprehended unless the 
several words composing it are rightly interpreted, therefore 
the words That and Thou are being separately explained. 
The proximate cause of the universe, Maya, abounding in 
darkness (Tama Gund) and its instrumental cause or material 
agent {(Maya) Illusion abounding in pure goodness, with the 
associate Parabrahma is indicated by the word That. 

45. The same associate of Illusion (Maya) abounding in 
impure goodness, full of desires, is indicated by the word 

46. Now if the conflicting portion be left out of the sig 
nification after the canons of Rhetoric of abandoning a part* 

* " This term is defined in the Vachaspatya as " Indication 
abiding in one part of the expressed meaning, whilst another 


of the indication, for the contradiction it implies, inasmuch as 
the same Illusion is characterised by the three different pro 
perties of pain, pure goodness, and impure goodness, the 
Impartite (remaining non-conflicting) consciousness is one 
in the two conditions of Jiva and Brahma, therefore this non- 
duality is indicated by the phrase. 

47- [This is illustrated] : As in the phrase. That Deva- 
datta is this, that and this refer to the same Devadatta with 
this difference in time that the first adjective pronoun refers 
to Devacjatta seen in past time and this refers to the present 
time, but if the contending element in the indication with 
reference to time past and present conveyed by that and 
this respectively, be left out, there remains only Devadatta, 
and that is meant by the phrase. 

48. So in That art Thou That indicates consciousness 
associated with Illusion Parabrahma, and Thou conscious 
ness associated with Ignorance Jiva, if the associates Illusion 
and Ignorance be left out there remains only the Impartite 
everlasting Intelligence and Bliss the Parabrahma. 

49- So far then, having established the Parabrahma as 
the indication of That and Thou it remains to be seen 
whether such indication refers to the associated or unassociated 
condition. For if such indication refers to the associated 
condition tt;en it reduces it to non-being (asat) and therefore 
cannot meatt the Supreme Brahma which is being (sal). As 
for the unassociated condition being indicated, it is an 
impossibility, for neither the eye has seen nor the ear heard 
it, besides the attribution of signs in the indication will reduce 
it to the condition of an associate. 

part of it is abandoned. As for example, in the sentence That 
is this Devadatta, whilst the meanings expressive of past and 
present time are abandoned, another portion of the expressed 
rrfaningf remains and convey*; the idea of the one Devadatta." 

Jacob s Vedfinlasara. p. 87. 


50. To such an objection it may be asked whether an 
associate is present in an unassociated, or described as a 
separate entity in an associated body. For what is un 
associated cannot be said to have any associate, as such a 
condition will reduce it to the very reverse of its actuality, 
then again as an associated body means a body with an 
associate, therefore when it becomes associated it takes up 
the associate, similarly the body may be associate and its 
associate, the body. Hence it leads to a fallacy in the 
premises and yields no satisfactory solution. It is called 
unactual defect/ Therefore such erroneous disquisitions are 
untenable on both sides. 

51. Now, such a fallacy is not confined to the points at 
issue in the foregoing instance only, but must be admitted 
in all bodies which have quality, action, caste, and relation, 
otherwise such bodies cannot be ascertained. In other words 
whether a quality resides in a body with qualities, or without 
them. In the latter case no quality can be present and in the 
former the same unactual defect is noticeable. , Hence it is 
only necessary to find out the simple presence of a quality in 
a body and not to analyse it after the above fashion as to 
whether it is with or without quality, with or without an 

52. Therefore to attribute to the Supreme Self any associ 
ate, attribute, indication or relationship is simply the product of 
Ignorance, for Self is simply eternal intelligence and bliss, and 
without any thing else. 

53. Thus to ascertain the drift of the real signification of 
the transcendental phrase after the method of the Vedanta is 
designated hearing about the PARABRAHMA. After having 
ascertained it, continually to consider and reflect on it with 
the help of the supporting arguments is called consideration 

54. By the two methods of hearing and consideration, 
when the mind free from all doubts and uncertainties comes. 


to be en rapport with the Supreme Self, it is called (Nididhya- 
sana,) profound contemplation. 

55. When such profound contemplation has been 
ripened it is called meditation (samadhi). In such a state 
when there is no recognition of subject and object, (e. g., the 
person contemplating is the subject, and the PARABRAHMA, 
the object of contemplation) but the mind merges into the 
object of contemplation, the Supreme Self, and the function 
of the internal organ is unmoved like the unflickering light 
of a lamp it is called (Nirvikalpa Samadhi) contemplation 
without recognition of subject and object. 

56. In such a condition though the individual has no 
actual knowledge, yet on rising from his meditation he re 
members that he was dwelling on the Brahma. Hence it is 
quite natural to suppose, that then, the mind assumed the 
shape of the Supreme Self, and unknowingly rested on Him. 

57- If it be alleged that during such meditation the will- 
force is suspended, hence it is quite impossible for the mind 
to assume .the shape of the Brahma and become one with it. 
For to awaken the function of an organ, exercise of indivi 
dual effort is needed, without which effort no function is 
roused. To such a query the answer is, that at the beginning 
of profound contemplation there was present intense effort, 
which by continual exercise formed into a deep conviction, 
and this resulted in a continuous flow of the function moulded 
into the shape of the Brahma. 

58. Bhagavan Sree Krishna compares the fixed condition 
of the mind in meditation to the light issuing from an un 
flickering lamp, in his discourse with Arjuna ( Vide Bhaga- 
but Giia, Chapter 6, Verse 19). 

59. Such meditation enables an individual to escape the 
karmaic law which hurls a man to repeated birth and death 
in this transitory sphere, to reap the fruits of his deeds, good 
and bad, committed in a previous state of subjective existence; 
it destroys both good and bad actions and leads to the growth 


of that pure religion which helps the individual to the know 
ledge of (Brahma) Supreme Self. 

60. Since it rains an unceasing torrent of nectar such 
meditation has been termed by men learned in Yoga the 
Religion cloud. 

61. After the destruction of good and evil wishes in an 
infinite variety of ways and the cumulated products of good 
and bad actions of previous existence have been uprooted 
en masse through the instrumentality of such Religion-cloud- 
mediution, the transcendental phrase becomes clear and free 
from obstacles, at first, to help the cognition of the Brahma 
which was hitherto present dimly and subsequently as plainly 
as a thing is discovered in one s own hand. 

62. The imperfect and obscure discovery of Self which 
follows, after hearing the discourse of an adept teacher, versed 
in Brahmnic lore, on such phrases as, That art Thou, etc., 
helps the destruction of all sins committed knowingly, like a 
blazing fire. In other words when one has come to know the 


Brahma, his wishes and actions cease. 

63. The precepts of an adept teacher on the aforesaid 
phrase so helps the knowledge of Self as to render Him 
visible, then as the sun disperses darkness, so such knowledge 
destroys Ignorance which is the cause of this material world 
[and cuts of the chain of consecutive re-births.] 

64. If one attached to the world will follow step by step 
the means of knowledge herein indicated and by close reason 
ing and analysis fix them in his mind, he shall then be able 
to cut of the chain of consecutive re-births, soon to attain 
to the state of ineffable bliss. 


FROM the Sruli we gather that before the evolution of the 
6 bjective world, there was present only existence (Sat) the 
Secondless Reality Brahma from which all things have been 
derived, hence an analysis of the several elements is necessary 
for the cognition of Brahma. For such a purpose, these are 
now being considered. 

2. There are five elements : ether, air, heat, water, and 
earth, distinguished by their specific properties of sound, 
touch, form, taste and smelt. Ether and the rest are marked 
ty the properties one, two, three, four and five in a consecu 
tive serial order, ether has only one, the next one plus one, 
that is two, and so on till we find the last having four 
properties derived from the bases, together with its specific 

3. To be more explicit, ether has only one property, 
Sound ; air, sound and touch ; heat, sound, touch and 
form ; water, sound, touch, form and taste ; earth, sound, 
touch, form, taste and smell. Hence, ether has only the pro 
perty of communicating sound as evidenced in echoing, air 
besides emitting a peculiar sound in its passage, also com 
municates a sensation of heat and cold which is touch. In 
the same way, heat manifests itself by its crackling noise, 
sensation of warmth and visibility; water by its peculiar rip- 
pling or rushing sound, cold feel, white form, and mild taste; 
and the earth by its sound, hard feel, divers shape, variety of 
taste, and good or bad smell. This is evident enough. 

4- [For the recognition of the said five properties, we 
have five especial organs of sense, to wit, the ears, skin, eyes, 
tongue and smell.] These organs from their separate seats 
becomes gradually accustomed to carry on their individual 
functions, and as they are very subtly hence cannot be seer. 


their presence is manifested by their functions,* by which 
alone they are conceivable, and they generally take hold of, 
or cover external objects. 

5. Notwithstanding the general tendency of the several 
organs of sense, to cover external objects, they do at times 
take an inward course. For instance, if the external meatus 
be stopped with a piece of cotton wool, the passage of sound 
will find no obstruction, but will be distinctly audible, through 
the medium of the air situated within. In the act of drinking 
and eating the stomach feels a sensation of cold and warmth 
in the same way as the skin does ; closing the eyes brings on 
darkness, and eructations convey taste and smell. 

6. Speech, prehension, progression, excretion, and emis 
sion are the functions of the five organs of action. (Here 
again we find, that there are as many actions as there are 
organs, an absence of the sixth function is due to the want 
of an organ to perform it.) Agriculture and trade &c, are 
carried on by means of the very same active organs, hence 
naturally they come within the aforesaid category of speech 
and the rest. 

7. Mouth, hands, feet, anus, and the genitals are the five 
organs of action. 

8. The five external organs of sensation, and five organs 
of action are controlled by the mind which has its seat in the 
lotus of the heart. It is likewise called the internal organ, 
(Anthakarana) for its inward action is independent of them. 
Not so with the external, for which it has to depend entirely 
upon the senses. 

* The Aryan Rishis never mistook the external organs, eyes 
&c., for the organs themselves, they are the external appendages 
merely. The seats of the sensory organs, or centres, are the 
several ganglia with which each especial nerve is connected and 
which carry the impressions to the sensorium, these are looked 
upon as the internal organ. 



9 The mind ascertains the quality or defect of an object, 
after it has been covered (taken possession of) by the senses. 
It has three qualities, the good or pleasant, the active or med 
dlesome, and the dark or plainful. They induce changes on 

TO. The changes induced by the good quality are indiffer 
ence to earthly pursuits, forgiveness and large mindedness. 
Passion, anger, temptation and struggle for worldly benefits, 
&c., are the products of the active quality. Idleness, error, 
sleep (lassitude) &c., are due to darkness. 

n. From the good quality of the mind arises virtue, 
from the active are produced the passions, anger &c., which 
in their turn lead to sin and other bad actions ; from the 
third or bad are derived sloth, lassitude and sleep, hence arc 
individual under its influence spends his time in doing nothing 
and keeps himself aloof from virtue and vice. What attaches 
personality to the individual functions of the several organs 
in connection with the mind is the agent or instrument. As 
in common parlance one who does a thing is known as the 
doer or subject (?) agent, or instrument, so the internal organ 
or mind is the agent, for it is resort of individuality. 

12. The objective world can easily be determined to have 
derived its origin from the elements, for their specific proper 
ties sound and the rest are the attributes of ether and the other 
elements, thus incontestibly establishing their elementary 
composition, hence further consideration is not needed. Not 
so with the organs. Here an analysis based on reason, and 
the teachings of the Shastras are required to show that they 
are derived from the same elements. 

13. Now there are five organs of sense, five organs of 
action, both controlled by the mind (which also must be 
reckoned as an organ, as it helps cognition). Whatever is 
known by the aid of these organs, reason, and Shastras is 
indicated by the word Edam (all this) in the phrase " Sadeva 
snya cdam," and it means the universe. 


14. Before the evolution of all this (universe) there was 
present one, secondless, existence (Sat) without a name or 
form. Such is laid down in the Chandogoya Upanishad by 

15. The three expletives one, secondless, and Exist 
ence are used to differentiate It, from bodies similar and 
dissimilar. That is to say, as a tree has its branches, leaves, 
flowers and fruits differing from each other, a leaf resembles 
not a flower, nor does a flower its fruit, nor either, a branch 
thus constituting its distinguishing individuality or segregate 
units, for though the tree is one, yet it has its composite units 
different ; and as such a tree is recognised from another of a 
different class by its family characteristics a difference in its 
leaf, fiower, fruit, growth, bark and stone, (its family character 
istics) and as it is easily known from other things as stone 
&c., it has therefore a third characteristic which serves to 
distinguish it from bodies dissimilar. (This may be termed 

16. So in the case of the secondless Reality, no such 
apprehension needs be entertained as to the presence of the 
three aforesaid characterising traits. For such a purpose the 
three expletives ("Edam, Ebam, Aditiam") one, sure, and 
secondless are prefixed. Thus is non-duality established. 

17. Moreover, it must be remembered that, as the Para- 
brahma is without form, and has no distinguishing individual 
ity as noticed in the instance of the tree and its fruit &c., you 
cannot assign any form or name to It, for It existed prior to 

1 8. Name and form are indications of creation, hence 
what existed prior to it cannot have a name ; consequently the 
Supreme Self which is eternal and formless has no differen 
tiating individual trait like the ether. 

19. If there were two or more existences (Sat) then to 
individualise or identify them as separate entities there must 
exist family distinctions, but as it is secondlebS and one, It has 


only one indication and not many, consequently there does not 
exist another body of Its kind. Virtually then, without the 
difference of Its associates in name and form, it has no dis 
tinguishing trait in Itself, therefore to describe the difference 
of associates and to admit them as belonging to It, is only 
conducive of error. 

20 Nor can contrast be instituted here. For It is exis 
tence, hence contrast or dissimilarity will fix on non-existence 
(Asat) as dissimilar or different from It. But what is non 
existent has no shape, hence the Parabrahma cannot be cleared 
by contrast. 

21. Thus is established the oneness of Parabrahma which 
is eternal, Intelligence, and bliss without a second ; but to 
establish it more firmly a consideration of the arguments ad 
duced by the opponents of this doctrine, is now being given. 
Some amongst them erroneously assert that before the evolu 
tion of this universe there existed (Asat,) non-being and 
therefore imply the non-existence of the secondless Reality 
which is (Sat) being and essentially existent. 

22. As a drowned man is bereft of his senses and loses 
the capacity of expressing himself, but is subject to extreme 
fear and hence is powerless, so these dissenters lose their 
senses and become bewildered when hearing the precepts and 
doctrines of non-duality and are overtaken by fear. 

23. In the state of meditation without recognition of 
subject and object (worshipped) a certain dread is felt, by 
those persons who are given to the worship of a personal God, 
such is asserted by the religious teachers of Gour [Bengal] 
who have laid it down in their works. 

24. Another name for the above variety of meditation 
is untouchable Yoga. Because the followers of personal 
worship can never acquire it, in spite of the hardships 
enjoined for its practice, hence it is untouchable and though 
there is no cause for fear yet like little children evincing dread 
when left alone, without any substantial ground for it, these 


devotees are unreasonably affected by imaginary dread, when 
actually there is none whatever in it, from the untouchable 

25. The venerable Sankaracharya looks upon such 
followers of personal worship, (Madhyamic Buddhists,) a set 
of controversialists who discard reason and anology from 
their arguments as totally ignorant of meditation without 
subject and object, for the cognition of the unthinkable, 
essentially existent Supreme Self. [They are unacquainted 
with such a meditation in which the person meditating loses his 
personality and is unconscious of the object of his meditation, 
the two are blended into one a non-dual condition] 

26. They [such Buddhists] discard the Sruti either from 
Ignorance, or from want of comprehension, and drawing their 
inferences from possible cause and effect, they promulgate 
atheism and deny the existence of Self. 

27. (Now the atheistic doctrine of non-being is being 
critically examined in the way of queries and and answers.) 
Oh ! ye Buddhists ! you assert there was non-being before 
the objective world was ushered into existence. What do ye 
mean by it? How can the meaning of the two words was 
and none-being be reconciled. Was indicates existence, and 
non-being non-existence, therefore two opposite conditions. 
Hence such an expression is full of contradiction. 

28. You cannot ascribe darkness to the sun or say he 
is dark ; to say so will be illogical and untenable, because 
the sun is the very opposite of darkness light this you 
know surely, and as light and darkness cannot by any means 
be looked upon as one or same substance, how can you pos 
sibly look upon as one and the same substance what is implied 
by the contradictory epithets was and non-being in your 
expression "there was non-being in the beginning" ? 

29. The Vedanta teaches the doctrine that the elements 
ether and the rest, potentially existed in the Parabrahma, and 
their separate designation and form are simply the result of 


Illusion, if you attach a similar signification to your non* 
being and fancy its existing potentially in the essentially exis 
tent Self, through the same Maya, then your non-being is 
transformed into Self and may you live long for it. 

30. If you say, that like your non-being our attribution 
of name and form to the essentially existent Parabrahma is 
imaginary, for in It, we do not admit name and form and if 
such attribution is due to Illusion, then that Illusion must rest 
on something (real), for an Illusion means a mistake for some 
thing real, [as in the familiar example of a snake in a rope] 
and without some reality resting in the back-ground no error 
can arise. Hence, how can it be possible for your non-being 
to convey a similar attribution to that of name and form. 

31. If you contend that our Vedantic expression in the 
beginning there was existence is alike faulty, inasmuch as 
existence is twice implied by the two words was and exis 
tence when they are considered separate, and tautological 
when otherwise, and therefore though "There was nothing" is 
alike faulty, it is passable. No, ye Buddhists ! do not say so, 
for repetition of a word is sanctioned by usage : 

32. As doing right, telling a word, holding the ascertained, 
&c. These words have familiarised repetition to all pupils. 
The Sruti has likewise adopted the same practice in its mode 
of instruction when it says, Before the evolution of the universe 
there was existence. 

33. The past tense in the above passage is used to instruct 
a pupil, accustomed to connect a thing with notions of time. 
That is to say, in considering the secondless Reality, though 
time as a separate entity is absent, yet as the pupils are habi 
tuated to time, the past tense is purposely introduced to help 
their comprehension. Hence the expression cannot lead to 
the inference of a second thing, in any way militating against 
the secondless Reality the Parabrahma. 

34- In common practice, with the objective world before 
you, whatever questions or inferences you gather are possible, 


Hot so With what relates to non-dual spirituality. That is to 
say, when there are many objects, and the knowledge relating 
to them many, then only questions will arise for solution in a 
variety of ways, but when the object of knowledge is reduced 
to number one as happens in the conception of non-duality, 
no such question or inference will cause an interruption of the 
subject, for then, that knowledge has assumed the impartite 
shape or in other words, become so modified and blended 
with the object, that it is one impartite whole. In such a con 
dition (non-dual) questions, and answers, argument and 
analysis are out of the question, for the knowledge which 
enables the individual to cover an object for the purpose of 
framing a question, or deciding an answer for it, has become 
reduced to one and cannot master any thing else, besides it 
has become already one with the impartite Parabrahma. 

35. To exclude duality from the spiritual Monad or 
Essence, the Smriti text is cited as authority wherein is men 
tioned, "Before the world had come into existence there was 
one, quite, because inert, vast so as not to be grasped by 
word or by the mind unspeakable and unthinkable, nameless, 
for it is impossible to portray an accurate description, 
indescribable because the eyes and the other organs cannot 
take hold of It, something the antitype of nothing, 
essentially existent. It is not fire, for it does not discover 
material objects, nor are they discovered by it. Neither is it 
darkness, as it enshrouds, nothing, for it is naturally un 
covered, all-pervading, and equally present everywhere." 
[Now the controversy between a Buddhist and Non-dualist in 
reference to the inferences of their sacred writings is being 
given; you, refer to a Buddhist and we, non-dualist]. 

36. If you ask, since the earth and its contents have all 
corns into existence, it is very natural to conclude there was 
a time when they did not exist, yes not even the atoms, 
for all created objects are equally subject to destruction. 
But how do we comprehend ether also was then want- 


ins, to avoid falling into the dilemma of admitting twain 
existences ? 

37. Oh ye Buddhists! If your conception of nothing 
in that period of the history of the universe when it existed 
not, implies neither contradiction nor any difficulty, then why 
do you misapprehend us> when we say, that in that very same 
prior condition, there was only present the ONE EXIS 
TENCE. The inference is very natural, for that prior con 
dition is equally present in both the premises, in your 
nothing and our * existence. They simply indicate the 
extreme negative and positive poles. In the same way as 
your negative was present, our positive pre-existed every 

38. If you say ether is visible as a separate entity outside 
the globe in the shape of its atmosphere, so that as regards 
visibility it is not an inconclusive argument, we may then 
enquire of you, when and how do you see it without light or 
darkness? In the absence of that light or darkness ether is 
never visible, and both of them cannot exist out of the 
universe, consequently you never see the ether without it, this 
you are forced to admit. Besides, according to your view, 
ether is not a really visible body. 

39. If you say that according to the Vedanta, the essen 
tially existent Parabrahma is also invisible, so here again the 
same difficulty crops up, which is pointed out in the preceding 
paragraph with regard to the visibility of ether, and the con 
ditions are therefore equal, to such a query we reply that in 
the state of unconscious meditation without recognition of 
subject and object, we do conceive the Brahma as a (positive) 
existence and have no knowledge of non-existence, which by 
argument and analysis we do away with. 

40. If you say, during such meditation, existence is not 
conceivable, for the separate function of the internal organ is 
at abeyance, and it cannot cover the Brahma. Our reply is, 
for discovering the Brahma the presence of Boodhi is nut 


ireeded. For, It is self-illuminated and requires no other 
extraneous aid for being discovered. Though not a subject 
of Boodhi (spiritual intelligence) yet it is duly reflected in the 
^consciousness, as a witness, a presence not to be put by, a 
real existence, and not an unreal nothing. 

41. Therefore after the mind has been freed from its 
subjective modifications of determination and [error, mistake, 
or] indecision and has attained tranquility, as its associated 
consciousness is manifested in the form of a simple presence, 
or witness, doing nothing, but in a condition of passivity, so 
that prior condition when it existed before the objective world 
had sprung into existence through Matter (Maya) is easily 
conceivable and implies neither any difficulty nor contra- 

42. The inherent force residing in the Parabrahma which 
is essentially existent, and which cannot be differentiated is 
called Maya. As the consuming flame of fire imparts an idea 
of its force, so the potentiality of the universal force resident 
: in the Supreme Self is plainly seen in the (creative works) 
objective material world. 

43. (Now this Maya cannot be said to be one with Para 
brahma or as something distinct). As the consuming force of 
fire cannot be said to be fire, so the inherent force of the 
Supreme Brahma (Maya) is not the same with It, to say so is 
unreasonable, for, you cannot say "I am my own force," hence 
the inherent universal force is not the substance itself. Then 
again if you admit it as a separate entity, Can you describe its 
separate existence ? [It will thus be evident that Maya and 
Force with which a Madhyamika Buddhist seeks to identify 
matter and Parabrahma, are two inseparably blended ; we 
all know force cannot exist without matter as a separate 
entity, yet to say that it is the same as matter is absurd, 
hence the contention in the paragraph just asks an opponent 
of the Vedantic School to describe force as a separate entity. 


But it may be urged that Parabrahma is force, and, therefore 
to introduce the same force either in a separate or analogous 
form is no less absurd. For what is force, is always so, hence 
force plus force is equally force ; under such circumstances 
the mind fails to comprehend the drift of the text. But no 
such ambiguity will remain, if we introduce matter in its 
undifferentiated condition, a condition in which the difference 
between matter and its inherent force is nil, the boundary line 
so to speak, in which matter losing its grossness, assumes the 
subtlety of superetherial finis, when no matter is distinguish 
able as such, but all is spirit or force ; and such an inference is 
derived from nature, for the boundary line between the mineral 
and vegetable, and between the latter and the animal creation 
is so gradually bevelled at the edges, that each passeses into 
the other by way of. transition. For a long time, Science was 
undecided whether a certain vegetable was the last link in the 
scale of the animal series or a vegetable, so much do they 
resemble each other. If such a view be accepted, and it is 
the one advocated by Kapila in his Mula Prakriti then the 
difference between Prakriti and Purush on which many have 
stumbled from ignorance, no longer subsists for all practical 
purposes, but for syllogistic ends we may go on dabbling ad- 
infinitum. The Vedantist here presents to his antagonist, 
(a Buddhist) the sharp point of a sword which cuts both ways, 
inasmuch as it takes the ground from under his feet and 
makes the position of the assailant really invincible. Now, 
Maya is described as a force and it is elsewhere described 
as the chief factor of the universe, consequently it cannot be 
anything less than matter. So that we come to the same 
point whence we started, e. g., matter and force. Otherwise 
the meaning is absurd. And this Maya or matter existed poten* 
tially in the Parabrahma and by an act of volition was created 
the objective world with the self-made Maya residing within 
It. Now such a doctrine is not open to the crticism that 
God made the world out of nothing, for nothing can create 


nothing. On the other hand He* created it out of matter 
which resided within him. If it be asked, since the Parabrahma 
is a pure spirit how can It have any connection with matter 
which is antagonistic to It ? We reply, that spirit and force are 
convertible terms, and we have seen that force cannot exist 
without matter, hence wherever there is force, there must 
matter be. It is emphatically laid down that Maya existed in 
the Parabrahma, and it is this Maya which evolved or creat 
ed the universe in a natural order of sequence, by under 
going change impressed upon it, through its force or 
Parabrahma. Without such changes being wrought upon it 
through the agency of its spirit or force, the universe and its 
stellar system could never have sprung up ; change is the law 
of the universe, change every where and in every moment is 
the grand centre around which are deposited the nidus of 
future planets, their sattelites etc., and the gradual, slow but 
sure dissolution of the present existing ones. In this way 
there never was a time when the world was non-existent, nor 
will there ever be a time when such will be the case ; though in 
truth it may be laid down that this world is not the first of the 
series; nor is our human race the first that has been called 
upon to fill or inhabit it. From close reasoning this must natur 
ally establish itself as an axiomatic truth, for if the Parabrahma 
is eternal and essentially existent, and if such Parabrahma 
cannot exist as a separate entity without its Maya, (or out of 
matter) then matter and its force must by natural laws induce 
changes in each other which must end in works. Such then 
the role. We use purposely each other, because we find Para 
brahma is one force, and we are told by Science that there are 
several forces attraction, repulsion, gravitation ; centrifugal, 
centripetal and gravitation synonymous with Satwa, Raja and 
Tama of Aryan writers.] 

* Parabrahma is always neuter, we have purposely made use of 
the masculine gender to indicate the creative act, prominently. 


44;. If you say the nomenclature of Maya is similar to> 
your nothing then you contradict yourself, inasmuch as 
it was said (in the 2yth para.) to be a product of Maya, thus 
then you are to regard Maya as something else then (50/)i 
4 existence/ and Distinct from (Asa/) non-existence or no 
thing, a condition that cannot be described, hence indescrib 
able : (virtually reminding the reader of Ignorance which is the 
same as Prakriti or matter, therefore Maya is matter.) 

45. Now for the proofs of such an assertion the Sruti is 
quoted. " Prior to the world s springing into existence, there 
was neither present (Asat,) nothing nor being as a separate 
entity, but only Maya (an indication of darkness) the inherent 
force of the Supreme Self, having no independent existence 
but deriving its tangibility from the Parabrahma. 

46. But such a consideration does not necessarily reduce 
the Parabrahma to the condition of a second. For the separate 
existence of a force outside of a substance is nowhere re 

47. If it be alleged, since with the decrease of strength, 
vitality is reduced and with its increase life is prolonged, we 
have an instance of the separate existence of force, it is laid 
down that strength or force is no cause for the prolongation of 
life. It is the cause of inducing cultivation, war, and other 
acts in which labour is concerned. Hence it has no separate 
existence from the body. Now, following a similar train of 
argument if it be asserted that since strength is the cause of 
cultivation, war, and the rest, we may as well attribute to 
the Supreme Brahma a second attribute or existence. But 
this cannot be done with any show of reason, for in that 
prior condition when the objective world was not in existence,, 
neither war, nor cultivation was possible, therefore, to admit 
them is absurd, (and a duality of existence is not less so). 

48. The aforesaid force (Maya) is not diffused in Para 
brahma, but, pervades only a part, in the same way as every 


sort of earth cannot be profitably turned into a jar or other 
earthen thing, but can moist earth only. 

49. To this purpose the Sruti says, " One portion of the 
Parmatma is engrossed in the whole elements, the remain 
ing three-fourth is eternal, pure, free, and self-manifested." 
In this way, the function of Maya is attributed to the Para- 
brahma in the Sruti, 

50. Referring to this subject, Krishna in his discourse with 
Arjuna says, " With a small portion of the body, I pervade 
the universe and occupy it (vide Gita, Chapter X. last stanza.) 

51. There are other Sruti texts and Shariraka Sutras 
equally corroborative of the above. " The Parabrahma by a 
small portion of its body pervades the whole universe, the 
remaining portion is eternal, pure and free." Sruti. " The 
Parabrahma is not wholly enshrouded in change, but rests in 
an uncovered, unchanged and unaffected condition. Shariraka 
Sutra, Book IV. Chapter IV. Sutra 79. 

52. But it is formless, hence to say that a portion of Its 
body is covered, and subject to change, while the other is 
not, implies a contradiction. This is cleared in the follow 
ing wise : The Sruti attributes form, for the purpose of 
explanation to a pupil. 

53. That inherent force Maya, abiding in the Parabrahma 
induces a change which finally ends in works usually called 
creative, but strictly speaking, evolutional, in the same way 
as by a blending of the primitive colors a beautiful effect is 

54. Now the first product of the change induced by 
Maya is ether, which is void. And as this ether is a deriva 
tive product of Maya, which again is a force of the Para 
brahma, its manifestibility is a manifestibility of its cause the 

55. Hence though Self is essentially existent, its product 
ether has two attributes, viz., existence and void. 

56. In other words, ether has the attribute of sound which 


is absent in the Parabrahma, therefore tl)e latter has only 
one attribute, whereas Its derivative product ether has two, 
viz., sound and existence. 

57. That Maya which produces ether, after establishing 
the identity of ether with Self seeks further to draw opposite 
inferences, by attributing the property of the cause to the 
product and transmitting that property to the product, that rs 
to say, Self is essentially existent, therefore to conclude ether 
is also similarly endowed, is a product of (Maya) Illusion. 

58. The fact is, ether owes its existence to Self, and it is 
non-eternal, for it is a created product; hence the assumption 
of the Tarkikas or other ordinary men who hold ether to be 
eternal, is due to Illusion. For Maya naturally l^nds to error. 

59. It is universally admitted that proofs establish the real 
nature of thing, while error has a contrary effect. 

60. Now this ether and the rest are looked upon in a 
different light, till cleared by the analysis of the Sruii, there 
fore pause and reflect whether it is eternal or not. 

61. Ether and the Supreme Sat (Being) are distinct from 
each other, for etymologically their signification is different, 
moreover the consequence of the action of ether on air is the 
presence of sound which determines or establishes that air 
and not ether. 

62. For He is all pervading, hence Self is the receptacle 
ef ether which is an action or attribute, thus considered 
nothing remains of ether to claim a separate identity. 

63. If you regard ether as naturally void, then it is quite 
different from (Sat) being, in other words you admit it as 
non-being (Asat). If you say though ether is different from 
being , yet it is not non-being, then you contradict yourself, 
for what is not being must be non-being and you cannot 
maintain the one and discard the other with any show of 

64. If you argue, since the ether is plainly discernible, 
it cannot be non-existent, for in that case it would have been 


invisible, we reply that it is the very nature of Illusion (Maya) 
to make nothing appear as something like an object seen 
in a dream, which is non-existent, yet plainly discernible. 
This we call unreal. 

65. In two co-existing objects no difference can be per 
ceived. Therefore the difference between the words ether 
and existence is thus established. Caste and person, being 
and body, quality and object are each different from the other, 
and the method by which they can be distinguished will enable 
a differentiation of ether and existence. 

66. (If you are not convinced about the mutual differ, 
ence of the two even after understanding it, the subject is 
further explained by the following questions and their replies.) 
If you say that you understand the difference between ether 
and being/ but you cannot firmly believe it, then state your 
reasons for disbelief. 

67. If carelessness be its cause, fix your attention and be 
earnest, if doubt, have recourse to proofs adduced in the 
Shastras, and weigh the arguments based on analogy and 

68. After the existing difference of ether and being has 
been firmly established in the mind by fixed attention, Shastra 
proofs and analogy, ether is no longer mistaken for Reality, 
nor is Reality connected with the perquistes of ether and 
mistaken with unreality. 

69. The Prajna always looks upon ether as non-eternal; 
and (Sat) being/ devoid of the attributes of ether ; (e. g.,) 
He is eternal, pure and free. 

70. The liberated in life with the aforesaid conception 
of ether and being is astonished to find ignorant persons 
holding opposite beliefs ; bent in worldly pursuits arid full of 
desire, they are devoid of self-knowledge, hence believe the 
reality of ether. 

71. Thus after establishing the unreality of ether and 
Reality of the Parabrahma, if the same line of argument be 


carried in reference to the four other elements, It will be 
found different from them. 

72. Though with being and air the resulting product 
of ether, there is no relation of cause and effect, yet from 
their mutual connection, their identity can possible be estab 
lished, hence to consider Sat frcm air their mutual relationship 
is being established. The essentially existent Parabrahma is 
closely situated to Maya, which again is similarly placed to 
ether, and ether to air, that is to say, each preceding one 
stands more or less in the relation of cause to its effect, which 
comes immediately atter, and for such relation (of cause and 
effect) it is possible to look upon air and being as identical. 

73. In this way, after ascertaining the relation of identity 
between them, their existing difference can only be made out 
by a consideration of the properties of air. Now air has 
naturally four properties: attraction of moisture, touch, 
motion, and velocity. And the respective properties of Sat, 
Maya and ether are also discernible in air (in the following 
wise) : 

74. The existence of air is due to Sat, and if such exis. 
tence be separated from it, then it is reduced to imperman- 
ence which is a product of Maya ; and its sound is the result 
of ether. 

75. In the 6znd verse it has been asserted that Sat is 
naturally present in air and the other elements, and not ether, 
but it is now said that sound, an effect of ether, is easily 
distinguished in air, this implies a contradiction. 

76. [It is thus cleared]. In the 62nd verse it was said, 
the void of ether cannot be established in air ; and now, 
sound, the property of ether is discernible in air, hence they 
do not contradict each other. 

77. If from its difference from Sat you admit air as 
impermanent and a product of Illusion, What prevents you 
to think it distinct from Maya since the indescribable Maya is 
a force and there is existing difference between force and air ? 


78. Because, that undefinable force or its expressed 
action is not due to Maya which is only an unreality or 
Illusion. Can you say both in the inexpressed and expressed 
forms force and action the same unreality is equally 
present ? 

79. In the consideration of the Real and unreal it is 
necessary to establish their difference, but there is no need of 
entering into the individual difference, existing in all things 

ncluded in the unreal. 

80. If from air the reality of existence due to the 
.Supreme Brahma be separated, the remaining portion which is 

material will be found to be unreal and impermanent. Hence 
you must cease to regard it as eternal and knowing. 

81. A similar consideration will reduce fire, which is a 
product of air but less pervasive than it, to impermanence the 
five elements are said to cover the universe (Brahma s egg) 
more or less, one over the other. 

82. In air, one-tenth of it is fire ; a similar tenth portion 
in the other elements is spoken of in the Purans. 

83. Now the nature and impermanence of fire is being 
determined. The individual property of fire is manifestibility, 
while existence, impermanence, sound and warmth proceed 
from its cause. 

84. Sat and Maya, ether, and air, have the aforesaid four 
properties, if fire with its individual property of manifestibility 
be separated from Sat, it is reduced to impermanence. 

85. The same consideration will reduce water to imper 
manence, which forms less than a tenth part of fire. 

86. The five properties of water derived from its cause 
are : existence, impermanence, sound, touch and form while 
its individual property is taste. Now by discriminating them 
from Sat, water is also reduced to impermanence. 

87. And in water, less than one-tenth of its proportion is 
earth, which being subjected to a similar analysis will es 
tablish its difference from Sat, (i. e.,) impermanence, 



88. In earth, impermaennce, sound, touch, form, and taste 
are derived from its cause, while its individual property \9 
smell, hence differentiating them from Sat will reduce it to 

89. If the essentially existent Reality be differentiated 
from earth, it is reduced to impermanence, and less than a 
tenth part, with its included Brahmanda, is contrived to be 
present in earth. 

90. In the Brahma s egg- are included the fourteen abodes 
Vur and the rest with their adequate inhabitants. 

91. The several species of being inhabiting the different 
abodes included in Brahma s eg^ possessed of five sorts of 
bodies (viviparous, oviparous, parasitic, and earthy) elementary 
in composition, when differentiated from Sat, are reduced to 
impermanence, in spite of their tangibility, which cannot in 
any way affect the secondless Reality. 

92. After having ascertained the unreal nature of ele 
ments, elementary bodies and Maya, nothing will create any 
disturbance as to the non-dual conception- of Sat. 

93. Even after the elements and elementary bodies have 
been ascertained to be unreal, the wise do not discontinue 
using them, though unreal, because by their tangibility they 
are capable of being used. 

94. Let Sankhya, Kanad, the Buddhists and other con 
troversialists use their specific arguments to support the reality 
of the objective world, we do not strive to disappoint them, 
for we are one with them so far as calling into requisition the 
service of all useful objects, what we want is to determine the 
reality of spiritual existence. 

95. We suffer no injury from them if they fearlessly shew 
no respect to the Sruti proofs explanatory of the secondless 
Reality, we in the same way, having framed our conception: 
from Sruti, experience and analogy, as to the unreal nature 
of every thing else the besides A/ma, disregard their duality. 

96. To show such disregard of duality is not unnecessary 


for us, because the more it becomes firm, the more will it lead 
to a just appreciation of non-duality. He is liberated in life 
who by an utter disregard of duality has confirmed his know 
ledge of non-duality. 

97. Such a disregard of duality and firm conception of 
non-duality does not lead to deliverance in life only, but helps 
the individual to attain emancipation (from consecutive re 
incarnation or re-birth). As in the Gita (Chap. 2, V. 27.) 
Krishna says to Arjuna, " Such a wise individual delivered in 
life is never re-born. In the end he attains to that ineffable 
bliss in the Brahma known as Nirvana." 

98. " In the end" is thus explained : In ordinary 
practice the scondless Reality and unreality are equally re 
garded. [That is to say though all material objects are non- 
real because impermanent, yet they are required for use, and 
are capable of being used, for they are tangible and taken 
cognition of by our senses ; hence in daily use they are not 
thrown away for their unreality, therefore their use brings 
them to a condition of reality, for what is false cannot be 
handled, or seen, etc., hence independent of reality or un 
reality, both are alike dealt with]. But when with discriminat 
ing eyes the unreal are separated from the real, that is meant 
by the phrase " In the end." 

99. Or, it means the separation of the vital air from 
the body, and this is its common acceptance. Even then, a 
theosophist no more confounds non-duality with duality. 

100. No matter whatever may be his condition in his 
dying moments, whether with or without any disease, retain 
ing consciousness and suffering the agonies of death, or 
perfectly unconscious, nothing can disturb the firm concep 
tion of non-duality which an individual liberated in life has. 

IOT. Even if unconscious when dying, his knowledge of 
non-duality does not forsake him, and as in the case of an 
ordinary individual when dreaming or dreamlessly slumber 
ing, his acquired learning may appear to him as if forgotten, 


but no sooner be awakes he finds it all right, so in the afore 
said instance, a theosophist s knowledge of non-duality does 
uot leave him when he parts with the body. 

102. Contradicting proofs must be stronger than sup- 
porting proofs, before an established fact, can be proved to 
be false, hence non duality based on Vedantic proofs, is never 
disturbed " in the end," because stronger proofs than them do 
not exist, therefore contradiction is impossible. 

103. Thus the self-evident truths which the Vedanla ex 
pounds to differentiate the elements must inevitably lead a 
man to ineffable bliss in the Brahma.* [For ignorance being 
destroyed there is no more materiality left to subject him to 
re-birth and he merges in the Brahma to be in a condition of 

According to the Vedanta-paribhasa, " The joy which ad- 
>f no increase is Brahma ; as the Veda says, He knew 
Jrahma to be joy." The acquisition of Brahma whose essence 
is joy is moks/ia, and it is also the cessation of sorrow. 

On the Jive sacs or sheaths. 

IN the Taitirya Upanishad it is said, the wise enjoy all 
happiness by knowing that the secondless Reality the 
Supreme Brahma is situated in a cell. Here the word cell 
has reference to the five sacs or sheaths, and as their consi 
deration enables an individual to a right appreciation of the 
Atma, the five sacs are now being declared. 

2. With a view to arrive at a correct signification of 
the word cell in the aforesaid paragraph it is now being 
defined : The physical body is the foodful sac. inside of it 
is the vital, within which is the mental, enclosing the cogni- 
tional within, and internal to it is the blissful sac, that is 
meant by it. 

3. [Now the foodful sac and its non-identity with the 
Atma is being declared.] The gross physical body is called 
the foodful sac, because it is formed from semen and blood 
which are an altered condition of, and derived from food, 
and because it depends entirely upon food, for its growth. 
But the body cannot be called eternal, or indestructible, as 
prior to its birth and after death it is wanting, hence it does 
not resemble Self. 

4. If you say that a derivative product is subject to 
death, and though non-eternal there is no harm in considering 
the gross body same with Self. (The reply is.) Prior to 
birth the body was non-existent, and therefore simply from the 
law of Karma it is fulfilling its present phase of existence, 
the future birth will also be a product of accumulated actions* 

* There are three kinds of works (sanchita) accumulated, 
(prarabdha) fructescent, and (kriyamana) current. Accumulated 
are the works of previous re-births which have not yet commenced 
to bear fruit ; fructescent have began to bear fruit, and current 
are those which will bear fruit in a future life. The Vedantac 


in the present life, which it is not enjoying now but will have 
to wait for a future re-incarnation, this life being simply a 
scene for the fruition of past actions. 

5. The five vital airs which strengthen the gross body, 
a<id induce the several organs to perform their functions is 
designated the life-sac. It is not-self, for it is insentient. 

6. The mistaken attribution of I and mine to the 
physical body and to worldly goods, is due to the influence of 
mind. This one is called the mental sac. It is not-self, 
because it is worked upon by the several passions which 
induce change. 

7. The shadow or reflection of intelligence (Boodhi) 
which in the waking condition occupies every part of the 
body and merges in ignorance in the condition of dreamless 
slumber, is called the cognitional sac. But as it is subject to 
the laws of birth and death, hence non-eternal, it is not-self. 

Manas and Boodhi (The animal and human souls) 
though for ordinary purposes are looked upon as the internal 
organ and non-different, yet they are differentiated into the 
mental and cognitional sacs, because Boodhi, as the internal 
instrument or agent, is the indication of cognitional, and manas, 
as the external agent, is the indication of the mental sheaths 

9. When during the fruition of meritorious and virtuous 
deeds the internal function of Boodhi is full of reflected in 
telligence and bliss, and after such enjoyment is over, that 
function blends in Prakriti (un-differentiated cosmic condi. 
tion of matter) it is denominated the blissful sac. 

10. Because it is liable to immediate destruction, it is not- 
self. Besides Self is not a reflected shadow but is light, 
eternal, infinite, intelligence and bliss. 

believes in the destruction of the first and last through knowledge 
of Brahma and one s identity with It. The fructescent can be 
only exhausted by actual enjoyment of their fruits during the 
present life. 


11. If it be said, that from the gross body, ta the bliss 
ful sac every one of them is not-self, can be admitted, but it 
is impossible to regard any thing else as Self, for nothing can 
be conceived in that way. 

12. It is indeed true that the physical body and the rest 
are easily conceivable and nothing beyond them can be 
determined as self. But what prevents you from identifying 
self with that eternal Intelligence through which you conceive 
the body etc. ? That is Self. 

13. It therefore Self is present as eternal Intelligence, 
Why is he then not cognizable? Because, he is Intelligence 
and not the object of cognition. [The introduction of subject 
will be incompatible with truth and infinity, besides it will 
create dualism ; for that which cannot be demarcated in any 
way is infinite, and if ft were a knowing subject (a knower) its 
knowledge would be limited by its object and cognition, hence 
not infinite. As regards dualism : if Brahma were conscious 
there would be objects of consciousness, thus there would be 
a relation,* and wherever there is relation there is dualism. 
Therefore Brahma or Self is knowledge, as an abstract.] 
From the absence of the cognitive subject and objects of cog- 
tion it is not known, not because it does not exist. 

14. As sugar imparts sweetness to a substance when 
mixed with it, but does not depend upon any thing else for its 
sweetness, because such sweet-imparting-substance there is 

15. And as from want of such another substance impart 
ing its sweetness to sugar, its own sweetness is self-evident, so 
from an absence of a subject and object of cognition, the 
Atma though unperceivable, is yet evidently Intelligence and 

* Says the Mundukya Upanishad, " Brahma is neither inter 
nally nor externally cognitive, neither conscious nor unconscious." 
Verse 7. 


16. [And we have Sruti testimony also confirming it] : 
Self is self-illumined ; before the evolution of all the worlds, 
He alone was existing, they follow the train of his illumina 
tion, and by him every thing is illumined or discovered. 

17. That Intelligence which cognises the phenomenal 
world cannot be cognised by any other object. The several 
organs are powerless to cognise it, because they are prone to 
cover objects of cognition, and are incapable of holding the 
cogniser himself. 

1 8. The proofs are: "All objects of cognition are 
known to the Supreme Self, but no one can know Him. He 
is different from all known objects and is yet separate from 
unknown. He is the Supreme God, eternal and Intelli 

19. He who fails to conceive of the Supreme Brahma after 
understanding Its difference from known and unknown, as 
knowledge itself, is merely a lump of clay in human shape, 
that is to say, it is impossible to make so dull-headed a person, 
understand the proofs cited in the Shastras. 

20. To say " I have no knowledge of the eternal Self" is 
as unreasonable, as it is shameful to say " I know not whether 
I have a tongue," and yet a tongueless individual cannot speak, 
similarly He is knowledge and not to know him will amount 
to a pei feet want of knowledge, a clear impossibility. 

21. Whatever objects you come to know of, in ordinary 
use, leaving the the things aside, fix upon that knowledge as 
Brahma, and it can be termed knowledge of Brahma, for 
there is not another thing resembling It. 

22. Though such knowledge, without the objects (as in 
the aforesaid paragraph) as Parabrahma, is really entitled to 
be called knowledge of the Supreme Self, yet a consideration 
of the five sacs is not unnecessary, because when they are left 
out by close thinking, the residue of knowledge as a witness 
represents the Supreme Self, that is never absent. This is 
is explained as follows : 


23. Intelligence as indicated by the word Self can create 
no misapprehension with regard to one s Self, that is to say no 
one can be so misguided as to contend that hens not in exis 
tence, this is impossible. And who will be his antagonist in 
such a contention ? 

24. Such a misapprehension with regard to his personal 
ity or existence never arises unless one is subject to a wild 
phantasy, hence the Sruti says " There is not one person who 
disbelieves his own existence." 

25. He, who contends that the Supreme Self is non-exis 
tent, is himself so, for his individual intelligence is identical 
with self, and as that has already been pointed out to be imper 
ceptible, then he is forced to admit his existence and with it, 

26. The illumination of Self is now determined by the 
following queries and answers. What is the Atma like ? That 
which cannot be determined as resembling this or that, hence 
what is neither this nor that, is Self. 

27. This refers to objects visible to the eyes, and 
that invisible objects. But Self is not a subject of cogni 
tion by sight, nor is he invisible, for He is eternal, self- 
illuminated, knowledge. 

Thus though unknowable, Self is determined to be eternal, 
and visible. 

28. Therefore we find, though self is imperceptible, yet 
he is visible, and the same arguments will establish his self- 
illumination ; moreover the Sruti indications of truth, know 
ledge, and infinity to Parabrahma are also applicable to Self. 

29. What is not liable to destruction is called truth, hence 
after the dissolution of the objective world, who alone remains 
as a witness, is the Intelligence known as the eternal, indes 
tructible, Supreme Self. 

30. As after the dissolution of visible objects, ether 
(space) alone remains, so what remains after the destruction of 



ether [and the rest] is knowledge, and that knowledge is called 

31. If it be said, nothing remains after the destruction 
of visible objects, and therefore we cannot call Self to be 
residue of destruction. [The answer is] Self is that unindi- 
cated something which you say remains not after destruction. 
Hence our difference is merely in words, the unindicated, and 
unascertaintble residuum, left after the destruction of the 
world is alike admitted by both of us, (you say it to be nought, 
and I say it to be Self.) 

32. With this object the Sruti seeks to differentiate the 
Witnessing Intelligence from all visible objects, " For even 
after their destruction he is indestructible, and is therefore 
called a residuum of destruction and eternal knowledge." 

33. The Sruti has in the aforesaid manner established a 
twain condition in all impermanent objects, one of which is 
determinable as liable to destruction, the other undetermin 
able portion is the residue left after it. Now this residuary 
portion of destruction represents the undeterminable, eternal, 
infinite Supreme Self, who is imperishable. 

34. In this manner is established his truth,* while that of 
knowledge has already been determined ( Vide Ver. ij ante.} 

35. "He is infinite" because Self cannot be demarcated 
by place, time or object. He is present every where, hence 
it is impossible to fix a boundary line as to his locality ; as 
He is eternal, time cannot affect him, and as he pervades 
every object, it is impossible to confine him in one thing. 
Thus then, as He is unrestricted by place, time or object, 
He is infinite. 

36. The Sruti is not alone in saying Self to be infinite, 
analogy alike establishes it, for our conceptions of place, 

* Truth is indestructible, and it is one, therefore it is Brahma, 
for Brahma is secondless. 


time and object are illusion,* they cannot limit him, hence 
He is infinite. 

37. It has already been shewn that the attribution of 
insentient material objects to Self cannot be true, inasmuch 
as in that case the infinite and eternal Self, unassociated con 
sciousness will be reduced to the condition of the finite. 
Neither can he be limited by Iswara and Jiva for their 
associates are illusory, then again consciousness present in 
both of them is non-different from the consciousness of 
Brahma, hence they are powerless to distinguish it. 

38. [Now the associates of Iswara and the individual are 
being set forth.] The force of the Supreme Brahma is 
centred in every object, from the blissful sac to the rest, 
and as it controls them all, it is the associate of the Lord 

39. If that force were not to control the laws which 
govern the universe, they will act against one another and 
reduce every thing into chaos and disorder. 

40. This force of the Supreme Brahma (which is eternal 
consciousness,) is intelligent, hence it is not impossible for 
it to exercise that sway which keeps the universe in order ; 
combined as an associate with the Intelligence of Brahma 
it is called Iswara ; that is to say when Intelligence is unasso 
ciated it is called the Supreme Brahma, andjwhen associated 
with the force Maya, it is Iswara. 

41. And Intelligence associated with the five sacs 
(already mentioned), is designated Jiva.\ As in every-day life, 
we find the same man standing in the relation of a father to 

* "Because the sense illusion is common and necessary law with 
all the senses, external light and colors and sounds are all 
illusions, the cold in the hand, or in the ice, heat in the fire, pain 
in the foot, taste in the tongue, scent in the nose, is all illusory 
throughout and yet essential to existence." H. G. ATKINSON, in 
The Phil. Inq. Vol. VII. p. 63. 


his son and grandfather fo his grandson, [so the one Intelli 
gence for a difference of associates is designated Iswara and 

42. As in the absence of a son and grandson, the same 
man is neither a father nor grandsire, so the one Intelligence 
when associated differently with Maya and the five sacs is 
designated Iswara and Jiva, and when not associated, it is the 
Supreme Brahma Intelligence. 

43. Thus when by the help of the aforesaid considera 
tions about the five sacs, an individual knows the Supreme 
Brahma, he attains the blissfulness of the Supreme Brahma, 
and after death is subjected to no more re-births , in other 
words, for one engaged in contemplating the Brahma, with 
fixedness of the mind, there are no more births and deaths. 
He is freed. 



THE creatorship of Iswara and contrivance of the indivi 
dual (Jiva) will form the subject of my present consideration. 
For in such a dual condition, the subjects that will have to be 
left out by him will be rendered apparent, the more so, 
that he may henceforth disregard them. 

2. The Shvetashvataro-panishad mentions, that the force 
Maya is no other than Prakriti (Matter in its undifferentiated 
cosmic condition, without its three attributes) and Conscious 
ness associated with it is Iswara. Now this Maya-associated 
Iswara is the creator of all these worlds. 

3. Those who study the Rhika Veda, say that the Supreme 
Self, Iswara, was present in the beginning. He determined 
to create the world ; and no sooner did such determination 
arise, than the creation of all (lokas) abodes followed. 

4. Ether, air, fire, water, earth, medicine, food and body 
in due order, have sprung from him, with his determination. 

5. " That with a view of occupying bodies numerous, 
did He create subjects and all the worlds." Taitirya 

6. In the Chhandodogya Upanishad of the same Veda it is 
distinctly stated, that prior to the evolution of the world, (Sat) 
the One Existence alone was present. He declared with a 
solemn vow, let there be a variety of worlds, and at his will 
fire, water, and various creatures sprang into existence. 

7. In the Munduka Upanishad of the Utharva Veda it is 
said that as sparks from fire do proceed, so from the imperish 
able Iswara proceeded various creatures sentient, and objects 

8. In the Vajasaneya Brihadanyka Upanishad it is men. 
tioned, that in its prior condition the earth was potentially 
but not perceptibly existent, at present it has assumed divers 


name and form both in sentient and insentient visible objects, 
rts : Virat, Manu, Man, Cow, Ass, Horse, Sheep, Goat, 
Birds, Ants, etc., both male and female. 

9. The purport of the foregoing Sruti texts is : The 
Supreme Iswara occupies in the shape of individual Intelli 
gence all animal bodies, and for his supporting respiration He 
is designated Jiva. 

10. The Universal Intelligence, with the collective aggre 
gate of active and sensous organs, the five vital airs, mind and 
intellect, constituting the Astral body, together with its in 
dwelling reflex Intelligence (individual) all these collect 
ively constitute, what is designated Jiva. 

11. Jiva permeated with that Universal Intelligence 
(Brahma) is yet subject to happiness and misery, for Maya the 
associate of Iswara (Lord) is alike capable of creating the 
universe as of fascination ; its force infatuates Jiva and 
subjects him to weal and woe during life. 

12. From such infatuation, forgetting Self, the Jiva is 
hurled headlong into the concerns of a worldly life, and misery 
is his portion ; thus the creation of the objective world* by 
Iswara is briefly declared. 

13. In the Saptanna Brahman mention is made of the 
creation of various manifest objects by Jiva. He has pro 
duced seven different kinds of food by knowledge and works. 

I4- Of the above seven varieties of food, one is intended 
one for ordinary men inhabiting the earth, two for Devas 
(Superior beings), one for animals, and lastly, three for (Atma) 

They are specified as follows ; 

15. The fust class contains grains; the second consists 

* Hence the manifested world is an indication of duality, the 
author has introduced it simply to show further on, the true aspect 
of the one Eternal Intelligence; the noumenal and phenomenal 
represent but two aspects of the One Existence. 


of sacrifices done half monthly, and monthly during full moon ; 
animals have milk ; and Alma has Mind, speech and respira 
tion for his portion. 

16. As all of them are included in the world, naturally 
they corne within the category of Iswara s work, and they are 
known so too, but as by his knowledge and act Jiva have 
admitted them into use as food, they may be looked upon as 
his production. 

17. Now all this world, and the seven varieties of food 
(above mentioned) indicating it, though identically the same, 
yet virtually they are known separately as products of Iswara 
and the admitted food of Jiva. Every object has a similar 
bearing, it has two aspects though naturally it is one, as a 
woman begat by her father is for the enjoyment of her 

1 8. Iswara s force a function of Maya gave birth to the 
world, and his determination or volition is regarded as the 
cause of creation. The desire of a Jiva for the enjoyment 
of all enjoyable things a mental function is regarded as 
a means for their acquirement. 

19. Though the creative products of Iswara cannot be 
re-created by Jiva, yet jewels and other precious stones, etc., 
(without subjecting them to any change of form) are differently 
used in a variety of ways, according to individual taste and 
intelligence or capacity of enjoying. 

20. And as such enjoyment is varied, owing to a differ 
ence in the taste, inclination and knowledge of an individual, 
though the object may be same, yet we find that one is very 
much delighted with a jewel, another is much vexed in not 
having it, while a third is perfectly indifferent whether he gets 
it or not. 

21. Thus in its enjoyment, we find Jiva creating three 
different forms in the jewels, (e.g.,} pleasure, annoyance and 
indifference, but as created by Iswara it is always one and 
knows no distinction. 


22. As the same woman stands differently related to 
several individuals, to one she is wife, to another daughter-in- 
law, a sister-in-law to a third, mother to a fourth and so on 
according to the knowledge of her several relations, though 
as created by Iswara she is one, and has no such distinc 
tions present in her. 

23. If you say that in the above instance the difference 
in the relationship of the female is merely established, and 
as that does not create a particular difference in her form and 
features, it is inapplicable. 

24. We reply, external objects are of two kinds: exter 
nally, they are elementary in composition ; and internally, full 
of mind; so that, if there be no difference in her configura 
tion or flesh, yet the mental function determines her relation 
ship as a wife, daughter-in-law, etc. 

25. If you say that in the conditions of error, dream, 
sovereignty of the mind, and memory there is possibility for 
the mental function overtaking an external object, but in a 
state of walking no such mental function appears probable. 

26. The answer is : When an external object is con 
nected with the internal organ by means of sight, hearing and 
the rest, it assumes the shape of that external object, hence 
in the waking state for an external object, to become mental, 
is admissible. This has been particularly declared by the 
Vashykar, and Vartikkara. 

27. (Vashykar s illustration is introduced as a proof.) 
"As copper melted in a crucible by heat assumes its shape, so 
the internal organ assumes the modification of an external 
object which it seeks to discover by taking possession of, by 
means of the senses." 

28. "Or like the sun, whose rays of light discover an 
object by assuming its shape, the internal organ which is a 
discoverer of all objects, assumes the shape of what it takes 
possession, and thus helps the individual to know it." 

29. [The corroborating evidence of Vartikkara is now 


being cited.] " When an external object comes within the 
reach of eye-sight, etc., the function of the internal organ 
originated by the demonstrating intelligence of Boodhi, takes 
possession of it, and becomes converted into its shape, con 
sequently as an object externally is derived from the elements, 
so internally it is full of mind." This can be admitted. 

30. In this manner, the twain character of a pot and all 
similar objects is established. They are both elementary 
and mental ; in reference to Iswara s creation a pot is exter 
nally earthy, but to the individual {Jivd} it is created in his 
internal organ, therefore mental.* The external earthy pot is 
cognised by sight, while the mental pot is discovered by the 
witnessing Intelligence of the internal organ. 

31. By the methods of Anvaya and Vyetrieka^ we know 
all mental objects cause worldly enthrallment and lead the 

* We find here two different sorts of creation. External and 
internal, or elementary and mental. The objective world is ele 
mentary, derived from the elements ether and the rest, while as 
their cognition follows only by the mind assuming their shape, 
the senses are simply, so to speak, the channel by which the func 
tion proceeds from that organ to take possession of them and till 
they are thus covered, to all intents and purposes they cease to 
exist. But this is so quick that scarcely have we any notion of the 
steps involved in the process oi a single act of consciousness. 
Then again some will have it, that it is transient too, for in the 
ordinary course of our every-day life we are continually forming 
conceptions of things and objects, which are replaced by others, 
and they again by others. That is to say a prior conception is 
re-placed by a second, and that by a third and so on, hence the 
supporters of the transient theory are called the Kshanik Vadins. 
They look upon the whole thing, as a current of consciousness in 
which the objects that are perceived follow [as a current of water 
in a river, or as waves follow continually without any break of 

t Anvaya 1 is relation of cause and effect. Vyetrieka is 
discrimination of separate distinction, 



individual to consecutive re-births : The presence of such 
mental objects produces pleasure or pain ; their absence, 

32. For instance, in the dreaming state, all knowledge of 
external objects is absent, but the mental function still conti 
nues busy in covering mental objects and enthralls the indivi 
dual, while in dreamless slumber, trance, and profound medita 
tion, both external and mental objects are absent and the 
mental function is at abeyance, hence there is no more 

33. When a father is informed of the demise of an absent 
son residing in a distant country, by a liar, he is sure to give 
vent to his grief in tears and crying. 

34. Or as in the absence of certain news about the death 
of his absent son, a father continues to live happily with a 
gladsome heart, though such son is dead, we therefore find 
mental function is the chief cause of worldly attachment 
everywhere in all individuals. 

35. [But it may be asked.] What necessity is there for 
establishing the existence of the objective world when mental 
function is the cause of an individual s attachment? 

36. The necessity lies in this : Inasmuch as the mental 
function must assume the shape of the object it seeks to 
discover, it is essential that objects must be in a state of 
existence so as to lend their reflection to the internal organ. 
If it be affirmed that from previous conceptions gathered 
in former births, the earth can be realised mentally without 
the external objective world, so that its existence is not a 
prime necessity, even admitting such to be the case, you 
cannot do away with its exposition as altogether useless, 
because that which is dependent on proofs stands in neces 
sity for the proofs of its existence, therefore in the tangible 
proofs of its existence the phenomenal world is not unreal. 

37. If such mental world be the cause of the individual s 
re-birth, then the practice of abstaining the minda gertaio 


form of yoga will help to stop such conception of duality 
that is certain enough. But what is the use of studying know 
ledge of Brahma ? 

38. Because by refraining the mind in the aforesaid 
manner, conception of duality is destroyed for the time being, 
Suspended, so to speak but no Jiva can be freed from suc 
cessive re-incarnations unless he has attained to the know 
ledge of Brahma, as has been over and over repeated in the 

39. According to the ( Avedabadi ) non-dualist, simple 
knowledge of the unreality of the external world, without 
refraining the mind from it, is enough to lead to a knowledge 
of the Brahma, but it by no means follows that a want of the 
external world will produce a similar knowledge of the second- 
less Brahma; 

40. Inasmuch as in (Pralaya) final dissolution of the uni 
verse and its contents, duality is wanting to contend against 
non-duality, the preceptor and Shastras are alike destroyed, 
yet no knowledge of the secondless Brahma is possible in 
such a condition. 

41. [Therefore] Iswara s creation the external worM and 
the elements which constitute duality is not antagonistic to, 
but a means for attaining a knowledge of non-duality, in other 
words without a preceptor and instruction on the Shastras, or 
a knowledge of the unreality and impermanence of the ele 
ments and elementary bodies which go to make up the objec 
tive world, non-duality can never be realised, consequently 
you cannot regard it unnecessary, Under such circumstances 
why do the other controversialists shew their spite against it? 

42. [Now Jivas creation of duality is declared.] The 
mental creation of duality proceeding from the individual 
is of two kinds : (a) Duality in conformity with the Shastras, 
and (3) Duality independent of them. Of them, the last is to 
be relinquished ; and so long as non-duality is not fully 
realised the first is to be practised, 


43. (a). This is to consider upon the non-difference of 
Self from the Supreme Self by analysis, and argument, cited 
in the Vedanta as desires pertaining to the sacred scriptures. 
It is to be continued so long as knowledge of truth is not 
acquired, when this first form of Duality is to be abandoned. 

44. On this subject the Sruti testimony is, "When by 
continual study of the Vedas and the Vedanta, unreality of 
dualism has been firmly established, and knowledge of the 
secondless Reality Parabrahma, is obtained, the sacred writ 
ings are to be abandoned, (for they have served their purpose 
and there is no more any necessity for them) just as a torch 
is extinguished by one travelling in a dark night when he 
arrives home or when he has no further need of it. 

45. When an intelligent person by studying the Vedanta 
and other sacred writings has obtained a clear insight into 
what is real and unreal, and after having ascertained their 
drift has acquired knowledge of the Supreme Self, he stands 
in no further need of them, that is to say they are abandoned 
just as a cultivator, desirous of reaping grains, uses the crusher 
so long as there are grains, and abandons it after the work is 

46. The quiet and tranquil-minded seeker of truth, bent 
on knowledge of Self, is deeply engaged on the cultivation of 
that knowledge and abstains from a grandiloquent discussion 
of the sacred writings, because that is fruitless. 

47. To know the secondless Parabrahma by restraining 
mind and speech and abandoning other words is the advice 
plainly set forth in the Sruti. 

48. (b.) Duality not pertaining to the sacred writings 
is also divisible into two varieties, of which the first sharp 
includes desire and passion ; and the second bad indicates 
mental sovereignty. 

49. Both of them are to be avoided by the seeker of 
truth, for the Sruti insists on mental quietude and medita 
tion as the means for attaining knowledge of Brahma, 


50. It is not to be supposed that they are to be avoided 
only prior to obtaining knowledge, but they must be relin 
quished even subsequent to it, by one desirous of being freed 
in life; because passions and desires are indications of 
ignorance and not of deliverance in life. 

51. If it be affirmed, since knowledge of truth cuts of 
future re-births, that is enough for my purpose, I desire not 
to be known as one freed in life, and no harm can follow 
from a continuance of passions and desires. The reply is, if 
you think in that way, you are sure to be re-born again, after 
enjoyment of heaven for a brief period. In other words you 
are no knower of Self, but simply a person engaged in actions 
sanctioned by religion. 

52. If you do not desire enjoyment of heaven because 
it is temporary, What prevents you from abandoning passions 
and desires which are faulty and worthless ? 

53. If after acquiring knowledge of non-duality, you still 
persist in keeping up your desires and passions, then you break 
the very sacred writings which guide you in your actions and 
become a follower of your own inclinations. 

54. If in spite of your knowledge of truth, you act 
according to the bent of your desires, where is the difference 
between you and a dog that lives on unclean food ?* 

* Two very extreme views pervail in regard to this subject. 
Yateshtacharan or acting according to a person s inclination is 
condemned by Suresvaracharya, an illustrious disciple of Sankar- 
archarya. Our author holds similar views too, and the passage 
in the text is an appeal to that end. But it is said, the Upa- 
nishads contain several passages in which the opposite doctrine is 
maintained, and a Theosophist is free to act as he likes. Professor 
Gough in his article in the Calcutta Review (1878, p. 34) says 
" The Theosophist liberated from metempsychosis, but still in the 
body is untouched by merit and de-merit, absolved from all works 
good and evil, unsoiled by sinful works, (Brihadaranyako-panishad 


55. In such a condition you are reduced to something 
werse than what you were before, inasmuch as prior to such 
knowledge you had to suffer from the pain of your passions 
and desires, while now in addition to that, people will speak 
ill of you. Ah how much glory then, does your knowledge 
bring unto you ! 

56. Therefore a knower of truth should not desire to 
follow the bent of his inclination like the swine and wild 
boar, but by abandoning passions and desires, he must raise 
himself to the dignity of a Deva and be an object of worship 
and reverence everywhere. 

57. [Now the means for relinquishing mental defects, 
passions, etc., are being determined.] To find out imper- 
manence in a desired object is an uncommon help to reduce 
it and the passion for it, to nihility. This has been repeatedly 
explained in the Vedanta. Therefore live in happiness by 
relinquishing desire and passion, and by regarding all things 
which excite your desire to be non-eternal. 

58. It cannot be said, that no such ill consequence can 
be attributed to the sovereignty of the mind, therefore at 
its presence is allowable, the more so, as it enables a person 
to spend his time in happiness. To consider in this wise is 
objectionable, for though mental sovereignty leads to no evil 
consequence directly, yet by its influence on passions and 
desires, it brings forth evil, hence it is to be abandoned. Men 
tal sovereignty is therefore the source of all evil. Bhagaban 
Sree Krishna speaks also of the injurious effects which it leads 
to, by its interdependence of, and influence on, desire and pas 
sion in the following manner. (Gi/a, Chap. II. V. 69.) 

59. " He who contemplates on [the acquisition of] wealth, 
begets a predilection for it, then follows an intense desire of 
acquisition, baffled in it he becomes angry and stupid, loses 

4. 4. 23) uninjured by what he has done and by what he has left 
undone. (Ibid 4, 4. 22). 


his memory, ultimately to die." Now what can be more hurt 
ful than mental sovereignty ? 

60. Mental sovereignty is capable of being removed by 
profound unconscious meditation/ which follows as a result 
of conscious meditation.* 

61. And one unable to practice that meditation, but who 
is devoid of all passions and desires, can keep back mental 

* Profound meditation is of two kinds namely : 

1. Samkalpa, Conscious, and 

2. Nirvikalpa, Unconscious. 

1. Conscious meditation : The subject, the perception, and 
the object constitute the conscious Ego. To realise the Brahma 
without a second by concentrating the mind which has assumed 
the shape of the I tripartite, and by indivisibly resting its function 
there, with the distinction of knower and knowledge, that is to say, 
with the retention of the individual Consciousness. Then as in 
the instance of an earthen toy-elephant, the mind takes cognisance 
of the animal along with that of its composite clay, so there is 
the perception of the Universal Consciousness (Brahma) co 
existent with the Conscious Ego, or non-duality. As it has been 
said by the subject of such contemplation " I am that Secondless 
Consciousness, everpresent, pervading everywhere, good, light, 
without a beginning (unborn), undecaying, unblended, innate, 
and free." 

2. Unconscious meditation is the resting of the Impartite 
mental function on the Reality Brahma without a second, and 
becoming one with it, by the destruction of the three integral 
constituents of the Conscious Ego the subject, the individual 
perception, and the object. Then as in a saline solution, the 
salt having been dissolved assumes the shape of the water, its 
separate existence is destroyed, but the water alone is left to be 
perceived, so to discover the Real Brahma alone by the mind after 
it has been moulded into the shape of the Impartite. Dhole s 

Vedantasara, p> 47* 


sovereignty by pronouncing the mystic syllable OM * with 
fixed attention for a lengthened period. 

62. Thus the sovereignty of the mind having been sub 
dued, it comes to rest tranquilly, having no function to dis 
tract it any more. On this subject the sage Bashishtha has 
given various illustrations to Ramachandra. 

63. When the external objective world is shut out of the 
mind, by due reflection and consideration or the secondless 
Brahma, and that has been visibly perceived, the way for 
attaining Nirvana is made easy. Then after study of the 
Sacred Scriptures on spirituality [The soul and the Supreme 
soul] with particular attention to their logical inferences, fre 
quent conversation with other persons on the same subject, 
and refraining the mind from the acquirement of material 
comforts, nothing is more proper than to commune with Self 
and stop speech altogether or to become silent, 

64. If as a result of fructescent works actions done in 
a prior birth but which have commenced to bear fruit 
a Theosophist be subjected to mental distraction, it is only 
temporary in duration, for by repeated practice he has learned 
how to restore tranquility, and thus he merges into Brahma. 

65. And that knower of Brahma whose internal organ is 

* This word is formed of A, u and m. The two first are con 
verted into O according to the rules of Grammar. Each letter 
has a distinct signification. In the Mandukya Upanishad, OM 
is said to indicate the Self-luminous Protector of all,(i.*.,) Brahma. 
Hence OM is a predicate and Brahma its subject, and between 
them there is no distinction whatever. Literally speaking OM 1 
can lay no claim to Brahma, but as in worshipping an ammonite 
(Saligram) a worshipper is to fix the form of Vishnu in his mind, 
though the stone has no likeness to him, similarly while medi 
tating OM 1 a person is to dwell on Brahma mentally. 


never liable to meet with any impediment* from mental dis* 
traction is fit to be recognised as Brahma. For it is the 
unanimous declaration of all devout sages " Such a person is 
not a knower of Brahma, but is himself a Brahma." 

66. In connection with this non-difference of a Theoso- 
phist with Brahma, Bashishta says, " He who rests on 
Brahma with his internal organ entirely merged in It, who has 
no more any knowledge of what the sacred writings teach, nor 
that of the objective material world, is himself a Brahma. 
He cannot properly be styled a knower of Brahma, for it is 
irrational to say that Brahma knows Itself, or is Its own 

67. Thus after the vast desires created by Jiva have 
relinquished their hold from the internal organ, he is delivered 
in life, and with that purpose in view Duality has been divided 
into two classes of which the first form, Jivas creation is 
treated here differently from the second Iswara s creation. 

* There are eight means* for unconscious meditation and four 
obstacles. The means are (a) Forbearance, (b) Minor observ 
ances, (c) Ascetic posture, (d) Regulated breathing, (<) Restrain 
ing the sensory organs, (/) Fixed attention, (g) Contemplation, 
and (/*) Conscious meditation. 

Mental inactivity, Mental distraction, Passions and desires, 
and Tasting of enjoyment are the four obstacles. 


On the consideration of Transcendental Vedti 

INDIVIDUAL Intelligence centered in Boodhi that helps the 
cognition of all objects by sight, hearing, smell and taste, and 
enables us to speak, is the literal signification of the word 
Prajnana in the "Prajnanam Brahma cited in the Aiterya 
Upanishad of the Rhigveda. That is to say, with a view of 
enabling a Theosophist desirous of release to establish his 
non-difference with Brahma, the four forms of Vedic expres 
sions used as a means to that end, are now being considered. 
The Rhik Veda says "Intelligence is Brahma." This is 
proved in the following wise : 

2. Since Parabrahma is all pervading, It is equally present 
in Brahma, Indra, and other Devas as also in man, cow, horse, 
and animals. As an internal knower, Its pervasion is universal, 
consequently it is present in me too. Thus then there being 
one receptacle for both the Intelligences, viz., Prajnana and 
Parabrahma, they are naturally identical, hence Individual 
Intelligence is non-different from the Intelligence of Brahma. 

3. The phrase (Aham Brahmasmi) " I am Brahma" cited 
in the Brihadaranyak Upanishad of Yajurveda is thus ex 
plained : That infinite Intelligence, the Supreme Self, residing 
in the body, composed of the five elements, by the inherent 
force of Maya, but discovered as a witness by passivity, self- 
control and other means for attaining Self-knowledge, is the 
signification of T (aham.) 

4. Brahma refers to the self-existent, all-pervading, 
Supreme Self. And am establishes the non-difference of the 
two intelligences expressed by T and Brahma. If, therefore, 
the identity of the individual and universal Intelligence be 
established, then the use of I am Brahma by one liberated 


in life necessarily implies no contradiction but an established 

5. In the Chhanrfogya Upanishad of Sama Veda the 
phrase (lalamasi) "That art Thou" bears a like signification. 
Prior to the evolution of all this [visible objective world] 
there existed a secondless Reality without name or form, but 
.all-pervading and is yet existing in a similar condition ; this 

is indicated by That/ 

6. The indwelling Intelligence residing in the internal 
organ of every individual, but quite distinct altogether from 
the physical body and the organs active and sensuous, is the 
indication of Thou. And art establishes the non-difference 
of That and Thou. Hence it is but natural to conceive 
them as one.* 

7. The Atharva Veda has likewise a similar phrase with 
an identical signification. (Ay am Atma Brahma) "This self 
is Brahma." Here the self-luminous visible Individual 
Intelligence is the literal signification of This and as it 

* It is said words are construed in one of three ways :(a) 
literal, (b) indicated and (c) suggestive. The first is that which 
is at once known with its pronounciation, it is due to its energy, 
strength, or force. Now this force sometimes fails to convey a 
signification, and we have then to construe according to what is 
called in Rhetoric cannons of Indication. There are as many as 
eighty Indications. But all of them do not concern us so far as 
construction of the transcendental phrases go. Here we have to 
do mainly with two varieties of them, viz., Indicative Indication 
(lakshya lakshan bhava), and Inclusive Indication, (upadana lak- 
shana). Indication of abandoning a part of the expressed signi 
fication (bhaga lakshana) is a composite Indication. "That art 
Thou" cannot be construed literally, but by abandoning the 
opposing elements of invisibility and visibility from the cons 
ciousness or Intelligence expressed by the words That* and 
Thou respectively, the remaining non-conflicting Intelligence is 
meant in the same manner as That Devadatta is this." 


resides within the bodily fabric, in all its components units 
from the physical body to egoism it is spoken of as Self. 
Hence the two words This Self indicate the individual 

8. The one cause of the phenomenal world and its 
substratum, viz., the Universal Intelligence is indicated by 
Brahma. It is Self-luminous too, therefore, the two Intelli 
gences are identical. 


Illustration by similitude with painting. 

LIKE a price of painting four conditions are present in the 
Supreme Brahma. 

23. Now in painting, the four preliminary conditions 
are : (a) Preparation of the ground, (b) stretching, and rub 
bing the canvas, (<:) drawing the outline, (J) finishing or 
filling it with color. Similarly in the Supreme Self we find 
present, (a) Intelligence, () Internal Knower, Thread soul, 
and Virat. They are explained as follows : 

4. The unassociated Intelligence of the Supreme Brahma 
is the first, and Iswara s Intelligence associated wrth Maya, the 
second condition. The subtle astral body [as subject of one 
Intellect (Boodhi) and called the Thread soul, for it pervades 
like a thread through all created beings ; and as a collective 
aggregate it is the subjective Intelligence of Hiranyagarbha,] 
is the third ; and Intelligence associated with gross bodies 
called Virat [for it is present in divers form] is the fourth con 

5. As in a piece of painting all the figures do not rest in 
one position, but some are good and others badly placed, so 
from the Turiene column to all sentient and insentient 
objects mountain, river, earth, etc.,and living beings, in short, 
every thing rests in due order on the Intelligence of the 
Supreme Brahma. 

6. As the different wearing apparel of the several figures 
in the piece of painting are conceived to be identical with its 
cloth (canvas), 

7. So the different Intelligence (Life soul) of individuals 
resting on the Universal Intelligence which is the substratum, 
is alike conceivable to be identical with that of Parabrahma, 


Variously do they finish their sojourn here after having as* 
sumed bodily form. 

8. As the wearing apparel in the painting are taken for 
the color of the canvas by a dull person, so the ignorant mis 
take an individual s career in earth for that of Brahma, and 
consider it so. 

9. And as the painted mountains, etc., require no wearing 
apparel, so are insentient material objects earth, etc., devoid 
of individual intelligence or Life soul. 

10. To consider worldly existence as the supreme object 
of life and related to Brahma is an error called (Avidya) 
Ignorance. It is removed by knowledge. 

11. For knowledge helps to show if Brahma were at all 
connected with the world then it would have been likewise 
eternal, but as it is otherwise, the world is merely an inherit 
ance for the Jiva, who is a reflected shadow of the Supreme 
Self; to determine this is called knowledge, and it can only 
be acquired by argument and analysis. 

12. This knowledge destroys ignorance; hence it is 
always necessary to determine the nature of the world, indivi 
dual and Brahma. Because then the impermanence of the two 
first is clearly established, and their incompatible residue 
Brahma, (incompatible, because permanent) is discovered as 
eternal and pure. 

13. Thus then to find out the transitory condition of all 
created objects, to ascertain that incompatible residue [of des 
truction] the Supreme Brahma, is knowledge, and it leads to 
emancipation. Now the word incompatible does not refer 
to knowledge, in that case it will be want of knowledge, and an 
individual in trance and profound dreamless slumber may as 
well expect to be freed. 

14. When real knowledge of Brahma is firmly established, 
and the world reduced to impermanence and unreality, that is 
meant by incompatibility, This is its proper signification, 


otherwise to forget the world is not meant, as in that case, 
emancipation in life will be impossible. 

15. From such a consideration arises two sorts of 
knowledge: invisible and visible; the former is to be con 
tinually practised till it leads to the latter, when all analysis 
and arguments are to cease. 

16. [The invisible/ and visible are now being 
explained.] Knowledge which establishes Brahma to be 
Secondless, Intelligence and Cause of all, is called invisible . 
and when it helps a person to say "I am the eternal, true, and 
free Brahma," it is called visible. 

17. This second sort of knowledge is facilitated by 
enquiring into Self, hence that is imperatively needed ; 
because by means of it, the individual freed from all fetters, 
abides in Intelligence (Brahma) and soon enjoys that felicity 
whose sole essence is joy.* 

* Liberation is the acquisition of Brahma, whose essence is 
joy and the cessation of misery. For we find it said in the Veda 
"The knower of Brahma becomes Brahma, the knower of self 
passes beyond all miser} ." Now, sensuous gratifications or abode 
in heaven, or any other blissful region is not Moksha, for they are 
derived from works, therefore transitory and non-eternal. The 
blissfulness of Brahma is not open to a similar objection, it is 
eternal; we are deluded into an opposite belief simply from 
Ignorance, hence the destruction of that Ignorance by cultivating 
self-knowledge. Though the means prescribed for that end 
helps the cognition of Brahma and removes the envelopment of 
Ignorance, yet it cannot be said that as knowledge brings in 
conception of bliss and destruction of misery ; prior to it, there 
was neither perception of felicity nor cessation of sorrow, thus 
blissfulness of Brahma has a beginning, and what has a beginning 
is open to destruction, therefore, both bliss and the cessation of 
misery are non-eternal. 

Then again to say, that it is useless to attempt acquiring a 

thing already got, that is to say, since the felicity of Brahma is 

naturally present, cultivation of knowledge is no longer necessary. 


18. (The nature of Intelligence is to be ascertained 
before enquiring into Self, with this view it is considered in 
its four aspects.) They are : Uniform,* Brahma, Individual 
and Iswara Intelligences. As the same ether for a difference 
of its associate receives various appellations, so is one Intelli 
gence severally called. 

19. For instance. There is pitcher-ether as follows : 
that is to say, ether confined within and bounded by a pitcher, 
to distinguish it from the impartite and all-pervading ether 
called Afahakas.^ Aqueous-ether or reflection of the sky with 
stars and cloud in the water contained in a pitcher. 

2021. Now the clouds present in the great body of 
(unappropriated) ether represent vapor, which is simply a 
transformed condition of water (for vapor is a product of 
evaporation of water by the sun s rays) hence the reflection of 
ether in cloud is easy to conceive, and as such it has a separate 
designation, and called cloud-ether. 

22. From quintuplication of elements is produced the 
gross body which is likewise called the foodful sac for its 
dependence upon food ; the three other sacs, Vital, Mental, 
and Blissful, are not a result of such combination, and they 
constitute the Astral body. Intelligence pervading it, is 
termed uniform, because it knows no change. 

But that should not be, because we find it so happen, when a man 
has forgotten about a piece of gold in his hand, he recovers pos 
session of it, as if he had not got it already, when pointed out by 
another. In the same way, acquisition of bliss already possessed 
and destruction of misery already destroyed, can only be 
recovered by means of knowledge, hence cultivation of know- 
ledge is a proper object for an individual to be engaged in. 

* Kutasta chaitanya is perpetually and universally the same, 
hence it is uniform. 

t Maha means great; because it is the source of that, appro- 
pnated by a pitcher, etc., in short, it pervades everywhere in 
and out. 


23. The reflection of uniform Intelligence on Boodhi* 
for its supporting the vitai airs,f is called Jiva, and he is sub 
ject to pleasure and pain. 

24. With a view of ascertaining the unassociated and 
associated nature of the Intelligences, uniform and indivi 
dual, they are here regarded separate, but from ignornance 
Jiva is incapable of determining the exact nature of the first, 
hence it can be said that he shuts such knowledge; in the 
same way as ether of the water contained in a pitcher dis 
places the pitcher-ether. In the Commentaries of Sariraka 
treatises it is called (Anayanyadhyas} Mutual Illusion. 

25. The cause of this mutual illusory attribution or trans 
ferring one intelligence to the other is (Avidya) Ignorance, 

or as it is otherwise called Primordial, Ignorance, without a 
beginning. That prevents Jiva from perceiving the nature of 
uniform Intelligence. 

26. Now this Ignorance:}: has two powers. 
(a) Concealment and (b) Projection. 

(a} Concealment prevents the apprehension of the eternal, 
self-illuminated, uniform Intelligence, and renders it invisible. 

27. Concealment or want of apprehension receives corro- 
boration from the experience of an ignorant person, who if 
asked about the uniform Intelligence says "I know it not," 
"I cannot apprehend it," and " There is no such thing as 
uniform Intelligence." 

28. If one is inclined to argue in the following strain : 
As shadow and light cannot rest together, so Ignorance 
cannot exist with uniform Intelligence, whose nature is light, 
for they are antagonistic to one another, consequently where 
ignorance is wanting, concealment cannot be expected to be 

* Intellect. Mn Sinnet in his Esoteric Buddhism calls 
Spiritual Soul. 

f Inspiration, expiration, etc. 
| Nescience. 


present," the experience of ignorant persons as exemplified 
above will remove his mistake. 

29. If one would not trust to his own experience, How 
can a Tarkika determine an entity by argument ? It will not 
help him. Because argument has no end ; one person draws 
his inference in one way, which a man of intellect refutes and 
determines differently. 

30. Though argument alone cannot ascertain truth, yet 
to help jts apprehension, if probable (conformable) arguments 
are required, you can have recourse to them, in a manner, as 
will help Boodhi to draw natural inferences in conformity to 
experience, but abstain from close reasoning and ill-matched 
arguments in the elucidation of truth, for sophistry misleads 
and is a source of great evil. 

31. Now the probable arguments to determine the uni 
form Intelligence conformable to experience, are being 
reiterated. While describing the power of envelopment of 
Ignorance the experience of a person in reference to it has 
already been mentioned. He says- " I know it not," etc. 
Therefore use conformable arguments as help the ascer 
tainment of the uniform Intelligence and in no way bear 
against it. 

32. If you regard the discoverer of the power of envelop 
ment or concealment of Ignorance uniform Intelligence as 
opposed to it, How can you otherwise apprehend conceal 
ment? (This you cannot). Therefore know the indication of 
a wise man and look upon (vivcka) discrimination as an 
antagonist of (avidya) nescience or Ignorance. 

33. () Projection or superimposition is now being set 
forth. It may likewise be termed misapprehension. It is 
determined by the illustration of silver in nacre. That is to 
say as silver is mistaken in nacre from illusion, so from 
the force of creation or superimposition, the uniform Intel 
ligence, enveloped in ignorance is apt to be mistaken for the 
physical and subtle bodies and individual intelligence. This 


is called the mistaken attribution of creation, superimposition 
or projection. 

34. When nacre is mistaken for silver, though the silver 
is entirely false, yet the [preceeding portion] lying in front 
and designated by the term, This nacre is not unreal ; 
similarly though the attribution of individual intelligence to 
the uniform is not real, yet its practical resemblance to Self 
and Reality is a fact. 

35. And as during the occurrence of that mistake, its 
tri-angular shape and blue color cease to be present in the 
nacre, so the unassociated felicity, etc., of uniform Intelligence 
are removed, when it is mistaken for individual intelligence. 

36. Thus then as in its illusion, the mistaken perception 
of nacre is called silver, so the superimposition of false 
perception on uniform Intelligence is Jiva. 

37. Then again, as in nacre, illusion of silver occurs only 
when its preceeding part is visible, so the attribution of Jiva 
to uniform intelligence only follows on the parts represented 
by Self and Reality. 

38. Though as a matter of fact, a mistake is the substitu 
tion of one thing for another, yet without a close resemblance 
of the two, no mistake is apt to occur ; now in the case of 
nacre there is ordinary and particular distinction in its fore 
part, and a close resemblance* with silver, hence the mistake ; 

* Two very extreme views prevail in regard to this subject 
amongst Hindu metaphysicians. Some hold that between a 
predicate and subject their does not exist any difference in the 
meaning. Bhadri supports the view of difference along with non- 
difference, while our author seeks to maintain the existence of a 
difference. The arguments on which each rests his opinion are 
being given here to enable our readers to comprehend both the 

It is said, there is difference along with resemblance between 
a material cause and its product, just as there is between a 
quality and its receptacle, or between caste and person ; between 


similarly between the literal signification or predicate of the- 
words self uniform Intelligence and l jiva there is both 

an instrumental cause and its resulting action, there does not 

exist such a relation both of difference and resemblance, but 

extreme difference only. For example, the instrumental cause of 

a jar, a potter with his wheel and turning rod is extremely 

different from that jar, which is a product of his manipulation, 

but between its material cause a lump of clay there exists both 

difference and resemblance, and if they were extremely different 

from each other, then the cause clay would alike have the property 

of producing oil, another substance extremely different from it ; 

but since it is otherwise, we may with equal propriety conclude no 

clay shall produce a jar. Similarly if the material cause of a jar 

were to bear the strongest affinity, resemblance or similarity with 

it, no jar would result. Hence there is distinction along with 

resemblance between them. Now for this difference, the objections 

of extreme difference and of agreement or the faults of difference, 

do not apply to this view. Thus then it is an established fact. It 

likewise derives proofs from our own perception, because externally 

we find a jar different from clay, but on reflection, we know that 

every part of the jar is composed of clay, hence the two are 


Bhadri thus refutes his rivals who consider the predicate and 

subject of a word, bear only difference. He says : If the 

predicate of the word jar be extremely different from a jar then 
as it fails to convey the import of a cloth which is extremely 
different from it, likewise it should fail to signify a pitcher which 
is also extremely different from it, moreover if you regard the 
predicate of the word jar to be different from it and admit its 
signification a jar or a pitcher which is extremely different from 
it (both in shape and size) then it may with equal propriety imply 
such another substance as does not bear any resemblance to it 
the same consideration is applicable to that other doctrine which 
does not admit the presence of a force, energy or desire in a term, 
hence it is faulty too. Because the predicate of jar, a pitcher, 
and a cloth, which is not so both of them are equally different 
from jar/ then inasmuch as the word jar has in it the force of 


distinction and resemblance, for which the illusory attribution 
of the former takes place in the latter. Therefore the words 

conveying the signification of a pitcher, and not of another subs 
tance, consequently beyond a pitcher the word jar cannot mean 
any other thing. Hence the strength of a word to convey its 
proper signification can only render that sense perceptible, and 
not a different sense. Thus then there is no defect in [admitting 
the strength of a word] regarding a predicate and subject as 
always different from one another. It cannot be alleged that 
along with that difference there is a close resemblance, (tadatmya 
$ambandha). Because difference and resemblance or non- 
difference are naturally opposed to each other ; similarly between 
a proximate cause and its product there is said to be only 
difference and not difference along with non -difference (resem 
blance). According to the view of a Nyayika or supporter of 
the strength theory [of words], consideration of difference only 
is not at all faulty, though his opponents attribute faults wherever 
only difference is maintained. For say they, if there be extreme 
difference between a cause and its resulting action, then as a 
lump of clay produces a jar which is extremely different from it, 
it may as well produduce oil which also is extremely different, and 
if no oil can be produced from clay, similarly a jar should not be 
its product. But this fault does not apply to the view held by a 
Nyayika, for he looks upon (pragbhava) prior condition as the 
efficient cause in the production of all things. That is to say, as 
for a jar to be produced a potter, revolving wheel, and stick are 
the instrumental cause, similarly the prior condition of a jar is 
its cause. In the same way, in reference to the production of all 
objects, their prior condition is a cause. Now this prior condition 
of a jar resides in its material cause (clay) and not elsewhere, and 
that of oil, in the seed bearing it, (seesamum) and not in any 
thing else, so on we find each and every object residing (potentially) 
in that prior condition in its respective material cause, and not in 
any thing else, hence clay produces a jar, etc., and not oil, simlarly 
oil seeds produce oil and not a jar and so on. Thus then as prior 
condition is a cause of production, hence to regard an extreme 
difference between a cause and its product implies neither 


self and T (expressive of Jiva) do not literally bear the 
same meaning. 

39. The difference of the two words Self and T is now 
being explained. The common acceptance of self and parti 
cular indication of T is being illustrated by reference to ordi 
nary usage. In ordinary practice we find Self (say am) used 
in a variety of expressions always attached to a word, as 
Devadatta (him) self goes, you (your) self see, I (my) self 
am incapable. But T cannot be similarly used. 

40. Moreover as an expressive antecedent is ordinarily 
attached almost everywhere as " this silver," " this cloth" 

contradiction not any other defect from the standpoint of a 
Nyayika. The same holds true with that other view of strength. 
For instance, moist earth can only produce a jar, because it has 
that strength only, and as it has not the strength of producing 
oil, no oil follows, similarly in an oil-seed there is the strength of 
producing oil and not a jar. Hence to regard a material cause 
and its product as extremely different from each other is not open 
to any objection. 

But to say that there is difference and resemblance, is 
objectionable. That is to say, if as Bhadri says that between a 
material cause and its product there is difference along with non- 
differece, then the objections pointed out in connection with 
difference and non-difference will both apply to his view. A 
gambler and thief are two distinct persons, yet when a person is 
both a thief and gambler both the defects properly belong to him, 
similarly in admitting a difference and agreement between 
property and subject, the usual objections against difference and 
its reverse must equally apply. But that does not affect the 
strength theory inasmuch as difference only is admitted. For a 
substance has the strength to hold qualities in it. Consequently 
the objection pointed out against difference do not apply. For 
instance if the form, capacity and its other qualities are different 
from a jar, so is a cloth different from a jar and it may as well be 
expected to be present in a jar. 


Similarly the word self is always applicable by attaching it to 
another word. 

41. If, therefore, T (ahavi) expressive of Individual Intel* 
ligence is thus shewn to be different in its signification from 

(sayarn) Self, then uniform Intelligence is to be called Self. 

42. And according to my view he is the Supreme Self ;* 
because self (say am) excludes the idea of another from us 
signification, [such exclusion determines the reality of one 
Supreme Self] and that is my object. 

43. Now the words Self and Atma are synonymous, 
therefore as the first excludes the idea of another, so it is 
natural to attribute a similar exclusion with regard to the 

44. As then the two words last referred are identical in 
their signification, the use of self in conditions of trance or 
fainting establish his existence likewise, as, "I myself was 
unconscious," here Self establishes his presence even in that 

45. Though for its pervasion, uniform Intelligence must 
be alike present in all insentient objects, as a pot, a pitcher, 
etc., yet Jhe distinction of sentiency and insentiency is not due 
to it, but is the work of intelligence reflected in Jboodhi and 
dependent on it. In other words objects with individual 
Intelligence are called sentient, while those without it are 

46. And as individual Intelligence is mistaken with the 
uniform, so is insentiency in the case of inanimate objects 
contrived to be present in uniform Intelligence. 

* As in the instances quoted: " Devadatta himself," "I 
myself," every where when self is added with a personal pronoun 
it excludes the idea of another as if by way of emphasis, and 
points out strongly the person concerned, so in a similar way when 
Self excludes the idea of other similar selves, my point is gained, 
and lean look upon bim as the one Supreme Self. 


47. If pervasion constitute Supreme Self, since he 
follows everywere in all objects, in that case all such other ob 
jects asfollow evenvhere jmay equally be called Supreme Self, 
that and this are equally present everywhere, and used in 
connection with all objects, which may be said to depend on 
them, therefore they ought with equal propriety be regarded 
identically equal to him. 

48. [The reply is] though the words that and this like 
Supreme Self, are plainly perceived to be attached to all 
objects including even the Atma, they are not the Supreme 
Self, but like other words signifying correct or proper they 
are merely attached everywhere, even in conditions of extreme 

49. The signification of that and this self and another, 
thou and T are antagonistic or opposed to each other. 

50. Of them, the signification of Self opposed to that of 
another is expressive of the uniform intelligence and the 
signification of thou opposed to that of T can be admitted 
as Jiva. 

51. As the distinction between nacre and silver is plainly 
perceived, so even after the perception of distinction between 
individual Intelligence indicated by T and uniform Intelligence 
indicated by Self persons fascinated with the world, attribute 
the uureal Jiva to the true uniform Intelligence, from illusion. 

52. But this illusory attribution of resemblance or 
identity (tadatmadhyas) is a product of ignorance, consequently 
when that is removed, the false perception of the reality of 
Jiva is also destroyed. 

53. Kowledge of self destroys ignorance with its force 
of envelopment, and its resulting action, false perception or 
mistake ; but the force of superimposition evolution, or pro 
jection of ignorance [i.e., misapprehension] and its result 
ing action of mistaken attribution (yikshepadhyas) require for 
their destruction the exhaustion or consumation of fructescent 
works. That is to say, without the exhaustion of actions 


commenced to bear fruit, by enjoying them, there Can 
be no removal of Self. 

54. Ordinarily speaking, after the destruction of a 
proximate or material cause, its productive action or result 
yet continues for a certain time, according to a Tarkika, so 
that to admic the continuance of illusory attribution, created 
by superimposition, or misapprehension, even after the des 
truction of (Avidya) Ignorance, its material cause, is possible 
for a certain time, depending, as it does, upon desire of 
enjoying fructescent works. 

55. If it be urged, according to the view- of a Tarkika, 
after the cause is destroyed its product rests for a little time 
only, but to admit such duration to a lengthened period, accord 
ing to the Vedantin, is illogical, the answer is : If thread, out 
of which a cloth is produced, be destroyed, to say that the 
Cloth escapes destruction for a short time, be correct, accord 
ing to a Tarkika, then when the cause of error which ranges 
for an indefinite length of time is destroyed, for its product 
to rest for a lengthened period is not unnatural, because to 
allow adequate time to a thing according to its space of dura 
tion is clearly maintainable. 

56. The above illustration is not cited by the Vedantin 
with the object of establishing a lengthened stay, after that of 
the Tarkika s momentary duration, but to shew that if he will 
only cite proofs which are not admissible, but imaginary, then, 
why are we to abstain from the testimony of Sruti which 
appeals to experience and involves no contradiction ? 

57. Hence there needs be no more arguing with the dis 
honest Tarkika, but it is proper that we should have recourse 
to reason, for in the aforesaid way the Sruti has determined 
the mistake of the uniform Intelligence indicated by self 
with individual Intelligence indicated by I and imagined to 
be one. 

58. And though that identity is only being conceived in 
error, yet simple argument is entirely powerless to clear this 



mistake of a Tarkika and others, who pretend to be wiser 
without a due consideration of the purport of Sruti on the 

59. Some of the opposing sects, unable to study the Srnti 
regularly in a consecutive manner, misapprehend the Supreme 
Self in an infinite variety of ways, and, incapable of rightly 
interpreting the Sruti, cite at random such texts which they 
fancy support them, without considering their applicability. 

60. The dullest amongst the Lokayats* says from the 

* Lokavata or Lokayatikas otherwise called Sunyavadins and 
Charvakas were a set of heretics. They condemned all ceremonial 
rites, including even the Sradlia or rites performed in connection 
with death on the occasion of parents by a son, without which no 
Hindu can be said to be purified from the impurity of death. It 
would appear, they were materialists and atheists ; looking upon 
the present existence as the best, they were of opinion that wealth 
and gratification of desire are the highest ends which a man 
should pursue, and there is no other existence beyond this. Their 
principal tenets were according to Colebrooke (i) the identity of 
self with the physical body, (2) rejection of ether as an element, 
(3) admission of perception alone as a means of proof. They 
were called Sunyavadins because they expounded the doctrine of 
nothing* preceeding every thing ; in short, from nothing has been 
produced the universe; and Charvakas from their teacher 
Charvaka Muni. 

A Charvaka calls the physical body, derived from the four 
elements fire, water, air, and earth his self, and argues thus : 
The subject of the perception of Egoism is self. " I am a man," 
" I am fat," " I am lean," " I am a Brahman," etc. Here the 
physical body is perceived as the subject of Egoism, and is ac 
cordingly taken for a man, or his qualities of corpulence and of 
Brahman, etc. Hence the body is self or what is the subject of 
supreme affection is self. In this way as a wife, son and the rest 
are conducive to the well-being of the body, and it is the seat of 
the highest affection, consequently the subject of the indications 
of that extreme love the body, is self, and the highest aim of 


uniform Intelligence to the physical body, the collective aggre 
gate of all these, is his Self. 

humanity consists in feeding that with good things and clothing it 
with good dress, jewels, etc., and death is emancipation. Now 
this requirs no other proof than what actually follows in every 
individual and is plainly seen ; look for instance at the appearance 
of a prince with all gold and jewels over, an appearance expressing 
supreme indications of affection for that body, the care bestowed 
on its feed and dress, providing all comforts for it, and contrast 
it with the care-worn .and pinched countence of a raggamuffin, 
yet even here, you will find him struggling all day long, for the 
maintenance of the body which regards with affection and care. 
All these are proofs enough and as they are everywhere visible, 
there can be no contention against their cogencey. 

But this doctrine of Chavuakas is clearly untenable. For if 
the subject of perception of Egoism (T) would constitute self, in 
that case, the organs of sense and action would be so ; inasmuch 
as they are also perceived in the same way, as in the expressions 
" I see," " I hear," " I speak." Thus then the organs are also 
perceived as the subject of Egoism, then again in regard to an 
individual s affection for his body, it cannot be a subject of 
Egoism, consequently it is a misapplication, therefore, the physical 
body is not self. Moreover, wealth and riches, wife and son, as 
they shew good deal of affection for that body, evince a similar 
feeling for the organs too, consequently in the absence of the 
highest amount of affection, the gross body is not a subject of 
supreme affection, and, therefore, it is not self. Further, as the 
body is wanting in sentiency or intelligence, it is not self, and if a 
Charvaka were to say just as a mixture of quicklime with catechu 
and betel leaf produces the well-known red color, so the body for 
its being a mixture of the four elements, derives its power of 
knowledge. But this is clearly impossible, for if a blending of 
the elements were to produce sentiency, knowledge or intelligence, 
we may as well expect a jar which is derived from a blending of 
the same four elements to possess sentiency or knowledge, but 
that it has not ; besides, in conditions of profound sleep, fainting 


61. And to support it, cite the 5"r//text which explain? 
the foodful sac. " This foodful sac is the Supreme Self, etc.," 
and * I am the Supreme Self." 

and death, the body is as insentient as a jar consequently insen- 
tiency is its normal condition and hence it is not self. 

If the physical body were identical with self we would never 
have fixed our belief in the identity of the body of our manhood, 
with that of our youth, though they are different from each other ; 
and when a person who had seen us in our boyhood come to sec 
after an absence of several years, when we have attained man 
hood, he for the sake of recognition recalls to our memory a few 
leading incidents of the past, and we exclaim, "Indeed that am I." 
As this is a common incident, therefore, the body is not self. 
Further, since the body is subject to birth and death, prior to its 
being born or subsequent to death, it is non-existent, consequent 
ly self who is eternal cannot be same with it. Because that wifl 
imply the acknowledgment of two defects of destruction of actions 
done, and the fruition of actions not done, after death ; both of 
them are inapplicable. That is to say, if the actions performed 
in life, were to produce no result, in the absence of self who is no 
agent and instrument, a person would then cease to practise 
works enjoined in the Vedas, and we see the contrary to be fact. 
Then again, for the existing difference of self of boyhood with 
that of prime, when a person has read the Vedas in his youth and 
boyhood should enjoy no fruits subsequent to that period either 
in prime or old age ; similarly all works done in the present life 
should yield him no results, thus the admission of destruction of 
works done already and their unproductiveness is injurious, and 
in a previous birth from an absence of a doer or agent no actions 
could be done, so that in the present life whatever a person has to 
enjoy or suffer should be equally the case with all, and there shall 
be no cause of the prevailing difference as to happiness or woe in 
its various shades, as we actually find to be the case, one is 
liappy, a second miserable, a third beset with difficulties, so that, 
it is impossible to acknowledge the fruition of actions not done, 
and along with it, the assumption of the body being self. 


62 63. Another Lokayala says since with the exit of 
the (Jiva-Atma) or Life-soul the body dies, and since Egoism 
(T) is plainly discernible in the organs, sensory and active 
and by them words and actions are produced, they, (the 
organs) represent Self. Thus doing away with the assertion 
last mentioned of the body being Self. 

64. To admit this is nothing inconsistent; though in 
words and the rest of actions Intelligence is not clearly discer 
nible, yet we cannot take them for insentient objects, conse 
quently (to a certain extent) it is allowable. 

[That is to say, Intelligence being the indication or sign 
of self, the organs as they shew signs of intelligence can 
justly be regarded as self. This is what another Charvaka 
says, but it is fallacious, because self is that without which the 
body cannot last ; in the case of the ergans of sense and 
action, we find a person may be blind or deaf yet living, he 
may be paralysed, his hands and feet are deprived of action, 
and progression, he may be dumb, yet living, consequently 
self is something distinct from the sensory and active organs. 
They cite in support, the expression " I hear," " I see," " I am 
blind," etc. But it is to be remembered the first personal 
pronoun used in connection with that hearing, sight, etc., 
establishes the possession of the necessary organs with which 
the several functions are carried on, consequently when it is 
said " I hear/ etc, it means " I have ears to hear," or " I see 

Now according to Charvakas the chief or ulterior aim of 
humanity consists in eating, dressing, etc., but it is not so, because 
a desire for a thing constitutes an ulterior aim or supreme purport, 
and as every one is desirous of acquiring happiness and removing 
misery, necessarily that desire is the supreme purport of humanity, 
and the highest of that felicity and extreme destruction of misery 
is called emancipation in the Sidhanta. But enjoyment cannot 
be ranked with this ulterior aim for it is apt to take an extreme 
turn, and there is no limit for it ; neither can death be taken in 
the light of emancipation. 


with my eyes," and not "I am the eye," " I am the ear." 
Thus then the perception of (subject of Egoism) T in con 
nection with the organs of sense is quite distinct from them ; 
then again, if their identity be sought to be proved by similar 
other expressions as " My sight is indifferent," " My hearing 
is actute," by shewing an attachment of sight, etc., with own 
self, it is simply a misapplication, for the cogniser is differ 
ent from cognition, and self being the cogniser is different 
from sight, hearing, etc. Moreover, in mental abstraction, or 
absence of mind, a person sees not, neither does he hear, 
though his sight and hearing are perfect, therefore, we may 
lay down the insentiency of sensory organs, and what is 
insentient cannot be similar to self. In connection with it, in 
a dead body the organs of sense and action are all present, 
yet they are insentient. 

Further, it may be enquired whether one organ is self, or 
whether their collective totality is so, or they are so many 
different selves. The first is quite untenable, for if it be said 
that a single organ is self, a person should die or be insenti 
ent when that is wanting ; yet the fact is otherwise, similarly if 
the collective aggregate of organs be regarded in that light, 
then in the destruction of one single organ, all the rest should 
equally be destroyed and their should be neither life nor in 
telligence ; moreover, if each of them were so many different 
selves then like ten elephants tied to one tree breaking it 
asunder, the body will be similarly affected by desires origin 
ating with each of these selves.] 

65. A worshipper of Hiranyagarlha says as life continues 
with respiration, though the eyes and the rest of the organs 
may be destroyed,* 

66. And as after all the organs, etc., are engrossed in 
sleep, respiration (vital airs) alone continue, and as its supe- 

* Hiranyagarbha is collective aggregate of Prana. 


fiority over the rest, has been mentioned distinctly in several 
places, it is therefore his Self. 

[But Prana is not self. Because like the absence of motion 
in the external air, when there is no respiratien going on, 
death does not follow, we find plants do not respire* like our 
selves yet they continue to grow, and preserve their vitality ; 
in regard to animated beings it cannot be said that respiration 
goes on during or after death, yet there are instances whew it 
is suspended, and vitality is seen to continue ; moreover, in 
sleep Prajia is awake, yet if it were intelligence or self, it 
should show the usual civilities to a new comer related to a 
person when he arrives at his house while sleeping, that it 
does not, nor does it prevent a thief when he robs him in 
sleep; hence it is not self, but insentient and unconscious. 
It is contended by the supporters of Prana, that with its exit, 
death follows, therefore it is self. But this does not hold true. 
Because with the departure [cessation of the secretion] of 
gastric juice, a man loses his appetite, wastes and dies, and we 
may as well call it self. Moreover, the superiority of Prana 
mentioned in the Veda is only with a view of producing an 
inclination to one engaged in devotional exercises. If it be 
said there are Sruti texts which clearly denote Prana to be 
self, but inasmuch as similar texts are also found in connec 
tion with the mental sac consequently one is contradicted by 
the other, hence it is not meant so; but it serves to establish 
the non-difference of the abiding intelligence seated in them 
with Brahma.] 

67. Mind which is more internal than Prana is said by 
its supporters to be self, after the manner of Narad s 
Pancharatra. They say, " Persons given to the exercise of 

* We know too w ell that trees and plants have inspiration and 


devotion regard mind in that light ;" and because, Prana is 
not an agent or instrument, but mind is so.* 

68. The Sruti texts corroborating the view of mind as 
self are pointed out to support them : " Mind is either a 

* Mind is not self. Because in conditions of trance and 
sleep, an absence of Mind is plainly discernible. Now, the AtnlA 
can never leave a body without causing death to it, but in the 
absent conditions, when a person recovers consciousness, the 
Mind is again restored to its original condition. Hence Mind is 
said to be insentient naturally, and is not self. In proof, we may 
cite the expression when from some cause or other, a person is 
under mental abstraction, on recovering from it, he says, " I was 
wandering in my Mind, and hence did not hear you." Though 
all the time, he was apparently listening to what was being said 
to him. Thus then, as Mind is apt to be disturbed, sometimes 
fixed, at others, unsettled, it is something different from self, who 
is always fixed. Mind is illumined by the reflection of intelligence 
from self, not that self imparts something of his own consciousness, 
of his own will, for that he has none, as he is passive, and action- 
less ; but like a needle attracted by a magnet when placed in 
apposition, the two Mind and Self from their close proximity 
to one another, are similarly influenced. Hence it is an agent 
and instrument. Here again there is difference, for as just said, 
Self is actionless, and, therefore, not an agent ^doer) and instru 
ment, whereas Mind is so, and is the cause of bondage and 
emancipation. But it may be asked how ? The reply is, in 
proportion as you beget a desire for material prosperity, the more 
are you enticed to search after it, and that subjects you to re-birth ; 
while on the other hand, after having ascertained the unreality of 
the objective world, when with due deliberation, you cease to have 
any concern for it, and increase your spirituality by the means 
of knowledge, your knowledge destroys the accumulated and 
current works leaving alone the fructescent for your consum 
mation in life, so that when you part with the body, you enter into 
that blissful state whose sole essence is joy, and which no eyes 
have seen, nor ears heard, and Mind can form no adequate 
conception of. 


Cause of a person s bondage or that of his release. * 
" Situated internal to the vital sheath, self, distinct from it, is 
full of mind." Therefore Mind is self. 

69. Some Buddhists affirm Intellect situated more inter 
nally than the mind is self. They say, intellect which is tran 
sient in duration is regarded by its supporters to be self, and 
establish its internal position in this manner : because the 
cause of cognition by the mind is due to intellect, and that is 


70. If knowledge or cognition, and the predicate of the 
word mind, namely internal organ, were one, how can 
there be said to exist between them a relative condition of 
cause and effect ? Hence their difference is being described. 
The internal organ has two sorts of functions Egoism and 
*This; of them, Egoism [I am I] is called cognition (JBoodhi), 
and This/ Mind. 

71. Since without the internal perception of Egoism 
there can be no such knowledge as " This is," therefore, 
Intellect or cognition is called the internal and cause, while 
Mind is the external and effect or action. 

72. Since that (Intellect) perception of Egoism [I am I] 
is apt to rise and disappear every moment, it is called tran 
sitory, and self-illuminated ;* 

* A Yogachara says Intellect or spiritual soul is his self : 
All objects whether external or internal are moulded after know 
ledge. Now this knowledge resembles a flash of lightning, it 
appears and disappears in a moment, hence it is transient. But 
as it discovers itself and other objects, it is called self-illumined. 
It has been compared to the light of a lamp and a river current, 
where wave after wave keeps up the continuity ; knowledge of a 
first object is displaced by a second, and that by a third, and so 
on ; hence the current of intellect or knowledge is of two sorts, of 
which, one is local, and the other continuous ; the perception of 
Egoism I am I is an instance of the first variety and is only 
another form of Boodhi. This is a jar and similar other percep- 

I A 


73. And the life soul in the Veda ; an agent subject to 
birth and death. 

tions connected with this : this body, this river, this house, 
etc., are all instances of the second ; they relate to external 
objects. The second or continuous flow follows the first or local. 
Hence the local flow of Boodhl produces the continuous which is 
its action. Therefore that one is self. Now the continuous flow 
is no other than Mind, therefore emancipation consists in dwell 
ing upon or concentrating the mind on Boodhi, and to be one 
with it, thereby fixing the transient flow of the intellect. But this 
view is objectionable. For, the action of knowledge in the 
perception of form, taste, smell, etc., like the sensory organs, eyes 
and the rest, being the means for ascertaining action, Intellect is 
not self ; but what knows it, which ascertains or cognises all 
objects to a certainty, is self, and as he is naturally luminous, 
he is always self-illuminated. That is to say, like the sun who is 
the discoverer or illuminator of all objects, which are, therefore, 
said to be discovered or illuminated by him, we have a similar 
conditional difference between Self and Intellect (Boodhi) ; Self 
is illumination and Intellect illuminated by Self. As the light of 
a lamp, covers or takes possession of a jar or another object and 
discovers it, the two are mixed, though naturally they are distinct ; 
similarly Sett who is consciousness is blended with Intellect so as 
to become one, and this twin medley is the means of perception 
from which cognition follows, though naturally they are distinct 
from each other. And as from a difference in occupation, the 
same Brahmana may be designated separately a reader and 
cook, similarly the internal organ which is a product of the good 
quality of the non-quintuplicated elements, ether and the rest, for 
its certitude is called Intellect, and for its action of doubt and 
resolution is designated (Mand) Mind ; consequently the division 
of that internal organ into Intellect and Mind for their separate 
functions of internal and external objects of T and this is not 

In reference to the transient nature of knowledge the argu 
ments adduced by its supporters do not stand a searching 
scrutiny. For, if Self be liable to destructioR every moment, iir 


74. A Madhyamika Buddhist says this transient cognition 
is not Self, for it is very short-lived, like a Hash of lightning ; 

the absence of that Self in a prior period, there can be no acquisi 
tion of wealth ; or a person advancing money to another with a 
promise of re-payment a year hence, must naturally forget every 
thing about it and will cease to demand or receive payment from 
his debtor. Then again, a person on rising from his dinner table 
will never express satisfaction the next moment that he has been 
well satiated, as he does ; a dead man may turn into a beast, a 
can of milk may likewise be turned into poison a moment after 
wards ; it cannot be aserted with any plausibility, that a second 
Self is produced after the first one is destroyed retaining all his 
conceptions, consequently the subsequent Self is capable of 
retaining the knowledge previously acquired by his predecessor, 
and this prior knowledge is said to be due to mistake. But since 
the transient Self is subject to destruction in a subsequent 
moment, necessarily in the absence of an observer and site, there 
can be no mistake [as in the instance of a snake in a rope, a 
spectator and rope are needed to create that illusion.] Moreover, 
as knowledge is non-particular, its conception cannot be ac 
knowledged. Even admitting conception to be a fact, then it 
must have a receptacle, vehicle, or asylum ; and if it be said, 
knowledge is the asylum, that will do away with the non-parti 
cularity of knowledge. 

If Self were short-lived, a person will have not the slightest 
inclination for doing meritorious deeds, but will lead a life of 
pleasure and run headlong into sin ; for his self is changing every 
moment, the first one gives place to a second, and that to a third, 
so that the doer of sin (they regard Self so) will be re-placed by a 
new self the next moment, and there will be no bad consequences 
for him, and there will be a total absence of desire of happiness. 
Further, on appealing to experience, we find a person say, " My 
intellect is dull ;" another says, "My intellect is sharp ;" here also 
the same difference is established between self and intellect ; for 
the intelligence of self knows no fluctuation, it is permanent, and 
self-illuminated while Intellect is illuminated by self, consequently 
dependent on him, therefore not self. 


but Nothing is self, as without it not another thing ca-n be 

75. And cite in support the Sruti text. "Before the 
evolution of the world there was present nothing;" and 
knowledge, and its subject, i. e., phenomena, are only illusions 
created on nothing.* 

76. But this assertion is inadmissible. For the asserters 
of nothing maintain the unreality of the world which they 
say to be a simple illusion ; but illusion must abide on some 
thing real, and in the absence of that site in Nothing for 
an illusion to arise, consequently nothing cannot be admit 
ted to be the source ; moreover, nothing also stands in need 
of Intelligence as a witness, otherwise it cannot possibly 
have any power or force. [To cite an apt illustration so 
frequently made use of in Vedantic writings, let us take the 
instance of snake in a rope. Here the site of the snake 

* A Madhyamika Buddhist calls Nothing ; his self, because 
self and things distinct from self, are like nothing, consequently 
for the resemblance of all objects with nothing, it is the principal 
entity. In profound slumber, a person loses all consciousness of 
external objects and he experiences nothing ; for, on rising from 
sleep he says " I knew nothing then." Moreover, to a wise person, 
the remnant of ignorance in the form of the Blissful sheath, is 
self a semblance of nothing. But it may be asked of him- 
whether his nothing is with or without witness ? Or whether it is 
self-illuminated? If the first, then that witness is something 1 
different from nothing and no other than self ; the second consi 
deration without a witness will be a contradiction, and the third 
view of self-manifestability only establishes Brahma by another 
name and remove nothing altogether. Then again the Sruti 
text cited by him from the Chhdndogya Upanishad that " Nothing 
was present before the world was ushered into existence" does 
not apply. It does not help his position. It has been purposely 
introduced to do away with the assertion of prior condition 
acknowledged by a Naiyayika, and Vaishcsika Buddhist, as an 
efficient cause for the world. 


fs rope, and when a person imagines, he sees a snake, that 
illusion requires the presence of the rope ; without seeing it 
there can be no mistake of snake. We have, therefore, a real 
rope existing on the ground, on which is projected the form 
of a snake through the enveloping force of ignorance ; and 
that snake is no actual creation, but simply a superimposition, 
for if it were so, a light helping us to know what the thing 
lying in front is, dispels it ; this will be clearly impossible. 
Hence it is said, if nothing is the real entity and phenomena 
are illusions created on nothing, like the snake in rope, that 
nothing must have something resting on the background ; for 
there can be no illusion on nothing, as there can be no snake 
without a rope, etc. Then again, who discovers nothing ? It 
cannot discover itself, intelligence is needed for that purpose, 
hence the real entity is intelligence, and the objective world, 
an illusion on intelligence.] 

Therefore, if Self were to be acknowledged as Intelligence 
what is different from the cognitional sheath and most in 
trinsically situtated, and existent too the Blissful sheath is 
self. This is the instruction given in the Vedas. 

78. Thus having shewn the contention about the nature 
of Self, his size is now being declared to be equally disputed 
by the several schools of thought. Some of them say self is 
atomic in size, some large, and others intermediate, resting 
their individual assertions on Sruti texts and reason. 

79. A set of dissenters known by the name of Madhya- 
mikas regard self to be equal in size to an atom, because he 
pervades in the finest capillaries which are no bigger than a 
hair divided into a thousand parts.* 

* But this statement of the atomic size of self is untenable ; 
for in that case, he will be confined within a small space in one 
particular part of the body, consequently a person will feel no 
pain all over his body in the case of illness. Self is a knower, 
he alone has consciousness, so that to feel pain in the feet as 
well as in the head at one time, clearly does away with his atomic 


80. Because innumerable passages to that effect occur 
in the Sruli. " Self is finer than an atom and subtler than the 

8r. Here is another illustration from the Sruli to the 
purpose. "The forepart of a single hair when divided into 

size. But then its partisans allege, as the sweet scent of a flower 
or musk is diffused at a distance from the spot where such flower 
or musk is kept ; similarly in spite of his atomic size, self is 
diffused all over the body, hence either pain or pleasure can be 
equally felt in the head and feet at one time, though they are 
distant from each other : but this is a mistake. Because oil seeds 
placed in a jar will not fill it with oil, and it is in the nature of a 
quality to remain confined within the body, whose quality it is ; 
hence, external to Self, there cannot be any quality of conscious 
ness. Then again, it cannot be maintained, like a sandal paste 
applied to the feet producing a pleasurable feeling of coolness 
all over the body, the consciousness of Self confined in one parti 
cular region of the body diffuses itself all over and pervades it 
everywhere. Because in the case of sandal, the watery particles 
of the paste are absorbed into the body thus refringerating the 
blood and producing the sensation of coolness, so that there is 
no refringerating quality present in sandal, it is only the water 
with which it is mixed, that has it, necessarily therefore the illus 
tration is not an apt one but extreme. Then again, they say, 
like the light of a lamp illuminating the interior of a room, con 
sciousness of self illumines by diffusing or pervading all parts of 
the body, though he may be confined within the narrowest limit 
in one particular part. Even this is open to objection. For self 
in that case will be visible and have a form like the lamp, both 
of which will reduce him to the condition of an unreality, subject 
to destruction, which he is not. Thus then, self is not atomic in 
size. The Sruti texts cited by the partisans of this theory, have 
only been misapplied, inasmuch as they were meant to impress 
dull persons with an idea of difficulty as to the nature of self. 
As atoms are difficult of comprehension, so is self difficult of 


hundred parts, one fractional hundredth only is an individual 
capable of knowing" so very subtle is self. 

82. Another sect called Digambars say, self is interme 
diate in size, because consciousness is present in every part 
of the body, from head to foot. And for the Sruti text : 
" This self occupies even the tips of nails." 

83. Though medium in size, yet he is capable of pervad 
ing in the capillaries; just as in the instance of the physical 
body when a person has passed his two hands in the sleeves 
of a coat, he is said to cover his body with it, so is the 
pervasion in capillaries attributed to self. 

84. But it may be objected, if Self were medium in size 
he could not enter the body of an ant which is small, and an 
elephant which is a big animal, from the force of fructescent 
works ; therefore, it is said, the entry of Self in the body of a 
bigger or smaller animal is due to a smaller or greater particle 
of self entering that body according to its size, thus estab 
lishing his medium size. 

85. But the attribution of form in the manner aforesaid 
to self will reduce him to impermanence like a jar, etc. [For 
name and form are indications of creation, and, therefore, non- 
eternal;] hence the view of a Digambar is faulty, as it implies 
the destruction of works without enjoying their results (of 
virtue and sin) and the (accidental) fruition of merit and 
de-merit without works being performed. Both these defects 
will apply to self. 

86. Thus then as both the views of self in regard to his 
s i ze excessively minute like an atom or intermediate are 
defective, consequently what is neither small nor medium is 
great, therefore, like ether he is all-pervading and formless. 
As the Vedas say, " Like ether he is pervasive ; he is eternal." 
11 He is formless and actionless," 

87. Like his size, the intelligence of Self is equally a subject 
of contention. Some acknowledge his intelligence, others deny 
it, while a third say him to be both intelligent and insentient, 


88. According to a Pravakara and Naiyayika self is in 
sentient, but like ether possessing the property of sound, he 
is a body, with knowledge or intelligence for a quality. 

89. They attribute to him other qualities as : 

Desire, spite, endeavour, virtue, vice, happiness and 
misery and impression. 

90. As these qualities are liable to come and go, the 
circumstances under which they appear and disappear and 
their cause are now being ascertained. When self is com 
bined with the mind, from the influence of the unseen 
{adrishta^) the qualities intelligence, etc., arise, but in the 
profound slumbering condition, when the connection of mind 
with self is cut off, they also are effaced or wiped away. 

91. Thus though self is naturally insentient, yet for his 
quality of intelligence, he can be acknowledged as sentient 
knowing or intelligent ; moreover, the other qualities, desire 
and the rest, likewise establish it; and as he is an agent, a 
doer of virtue and sin he is, therefore, distinct from Iswara. 

92. As happiness and misery are sometimes produced in 
self from good and bad actions performed [during life], so are 
desire and the rest derived from similar actions in a previous 

93. In this manner, though self is all-pervading, yet it is 
quite possible for him to go away with death, and be re-born 
in a fresh body, as is amply testified by the Veda when it 
treats of Works (Karmakanda^* 

94. A Prabhakara and Tarkika regard the blissful 
seath as their self, for it remains even in the profound slum- 

* If it be apprehended, since Self is all-pervading he cannot 
be subjected to metempsychosis ; therefore, it is said, the desires 
etc., of the present body are a product of works done in a prior 
state of objective life, and like the stay of Self in the present 
body, actions performed now will produce a future body, where to 
experience felicity or misery, in proportion to merit or de-merit, 
self has logo, to re-habilitate it. 


bering condition ; therefore, self is an insentient body with 
intelligence, desire and the rest, already cited, for his 

95. Now the followers of Bhatta (Bartikkara of the 
Purva Mimansd) or as they are called Bhat, regard this bliss 
ful sheath which is their self to be both insentient and sentient. 
For a person on rising from his sleep remembers that he was 
sleeping soundly and knew nothing then, a condition in which 
ignorance [insentiency] and felicity, both are experienced ; but 
for this remembrance of felicity, a certain amouut of con 
sciousness must necessarily have been present, hence the 
Atma is said to be both insentient and sentient. 

* But this doctrine of theirs is clearly untenable ; for to say 
that in profound slumber the absence of consciousness proves 
self to be instentient, is opposed to individual experience ; for if 
such were a fact, a person on rising from sleep would never have 
expressed " I was sleeping happily, I knew nothing then," thus 
clearly proving a remnant of consciousness, enough to leave an 
impression in the mind of the sleeper as to his perception of 
happiness, accompanied with ignorance. Then again, in the 
Sruti, Self is said to be without attributes ; therefore to attribute 
desire, spite, virtue, etc., which properly belong to the internal 
organ, is simply a delusion. Moreover, as the said qualities 
desire and the rest, belong to the internal organ which continues 
in waking and dreaming slumber consequently present then; 
but in profound slumber, that organ is absent, hence there is an 
absence of the qualities which mark it it will thus be found, that 
the natural inference of what has been mentioned establishes the 
internal organ, and not self, to be possessed with the qualities, 
desire, etc. There is yet another consideration which precludes 
the applicability of the view held by Naiyayikas and Prabhakars : 
for say they, self is all-pervading and manifold ; in that case it 
will be difficult to connect a particular self with one body, for all 
selves are related to all bodies, all works, and all enjoyments and 
connected with all minds. 


96. Thus then, the recollection " I was sleeping in 
sensibly," which arises in the mind of a person on his first 
waking, can never follow without the perception of actual 
ignorance or insentiency in such profound slumber, hence for 
the presence of ignorance and experience or perception, the 
consciousness of Self is said to be covered with insentiency. 

97. And since the Sruti mentions " Self is not deprived 
of his consciousness in that profound slumber," and as 
memory establishes his insentiency, therefore he is both 
sentient and insentient and like the fire-fly, luminous and 

* But this is open to objections, a few of which are here worth 
mentioning. As light and darkness are naturally opposed to 
each other, so are sentiency or consciousness, and ics reverse. As 
for instance, it cannot be said, " This man is a jar," so the above 
conditions cannot exist. For instance, if it be said, that the 
insentient part is perceivable, and the light of consciousness is not 
perceivable in self, so that for the same body or substance to be 
possessed of properties directly opposed to each other is clearly 
impossible. As from the sight of a stick, it cannot be said, " here 
is a Dundi," but there must be present an individual carrying the 
stick, to deserve the appellation of a Dundi; so from the know 
ledge of one part, insentiency, Self cannot be determined to be 
both insentient and sentient. Moreover, if the part representing 
sentiency or consciousness be deemed amenable to perception, 
then insentiency must fall in the back ground of illusion a 
creation of fancy. Likewise it may be asked of them who follow 
Bhatta, what is the relation of the two parts, insentiency and 
sentiency of self ? Whether it is due to combination or to an 
identity ? Or is it only a condition of subject and owner. From 
ihe first stand-point, self will be reduced to impermanence, for 
objects derived from a combination of two or more substances are 
material, hence non-eternal ; if the second view be maintained, 
insentiency will be identical with sentiency, and sentiency with 
insentiency, which is absurd ; the third will reduce self to imper 
manence, like a jar. We find, therefore, no proofs as to one half 


98. After thus exposing the error of the Bhats, the view 
held in Sankhya is now being set forth. A follower oi; 
Kapila (author of Sankhya Philosophy} says, a body without 
form cannot have both insentiency and sentiency ; therefore 
to say self is formless, would be meaningless. 

99. But the attribution of a recollection of insentiency to- 
self in spite of his intelligence, does not imply any contradic 
tion. For the perception of insentiency is only due to 
(Prakriti) Matter, which is possessed of the three attributes 
good, active, and painful or dark, and subject to change, only 
that self may be an agent or instrument of enjoyment, and be- 
freed from the bondage of re-births. This is its purpose. 

100. Though Self and Matter, for the possession of un^ 
conditioned bliss and sentiency by the former, and insentiency 
by the latter are extremely different from each other, yet from 
an absence of perception of the difference between Matter 
and Spirit, matter is regarded as the cause which helps self 
to enjoyment and emancipation ; and for allotting bondage 
and emancipation to Self, like the aforesaid dissenters Tartika 
etc., even the followers of the Sankhya School admit a distinct 
difference in self.* 

101. As proofs confirmatory of the insentiency of Matter 
and the unassociated bliss and intelligence of Self, Sruti texts 
are being cited in reference to the first. " For its being the- 
cause, the indescribable [Ignorance or Prakriti ] is superior to 
Mahat (Mahatatwa)." And in support of the unconditioned 
or unrelated nature of Self [we find it said] " This self is tin- 
associated or unrelated. 

of Self being insentient and the other half sentient ; for in the 
Sruti, Self is described as a mine of knowledge. It is true the 
Smriti mentions about this insentiency, but that refers only to 
Ignorance in the condition of profound slumber. 

* Kapila regards Matter as the cause of the world, and says,, 
it is likewise the cause of bondage and deliverance of the 


IOJ. Thus having exposed the fallacious views held by 
the aforesaid dissenters in regard to the nature of Self, their 
opposite doctrines concerning Iswara are now being declared. 
For this purpose, his nature is first determined. According 
to the followers of Yoga, Iswara is the controller of matter, 
closely engaged [occupied] in intelligence. He is superior to 
all individuals. 

103. As in the Sriiti " He is the lord of Matter and 
Jiva, and qualities." That is to say, Iswara is the Lord of the 
equilibrised state of matter, when its Satwa, Raja and Tama 
are evenly blended, (likewise called Pradhan or primary) - T 
the individual with his tenement of flesh which is called 

(Purusha) Alma or Spirit; but it Is open to objection. For in 
periods of cyclic destruction, matter is said to be in a state of 
equipoise, that is to say, its three properties are evenly balanced. 
Evolution begins only with a disturbance of this equilibrium. 
The first mentioned condition is spoken of as the natural 
(Pradhana), chief or primary condition, so that with evolution 
arises the insentient condition ; now if insentiency be the primary 
siate, the equilibrised condition will necessarily come to be 
secondary. Then again, from a want of association with the 
intelligence (self) there is no relation with the primal condition - f 
and as without a relativity of intelligence, the subsequent evolution 
cannot proceed from insentiency, consequently the primal cannot 
create ; and that primal condition is Iswara s intelligence endowed 
with Maya, who is the internal ruler and creator of the world. 
Kapila advocates the theory of the Spirit being manifold and as 
many in number, as there are individuals. But to say so is futile, 
because admission of the oneness of the all-pervading intelligence 
and the attribution of enjoyment, etc., to the association of the 
internal organ, are enough to settle the point, and the necessity 
lor such an infinite division of Atma is clearly removed ; other 
wise to regard the eternity of matter and manifold diversity of 
Atma will land us in the region of (sajatiya, vijatiyd) defects 
marked by similarity and dissimilarity, or in the language of 
Western physicists, isomorphism and disomorphism. 


ground for it is the scene of works already bearing fruit 
and the three attributes just mentioned for they are con 
trolled by him. It is not to be imagined that this is the only men 
tion of Iswara in the Veda. For the Brihadaranyakopanishad 
have texts explanatory of him, as an internal knower. 

104. Resting their opinions on such Sruti texts, as they 
believe support them, and which they construe according to 
their lights, a marked variety of opinion prevails in regard to 
Iswara among these controversialists. 

105. With a view of ascertaining the view held by a 
Yogachara, the nature of Iswara after Patanjali is being 
declared. He is defined as " A particular person unconnected 
with felicity or misery, merit or de- merit, good or bad action, 
their impression and composition. Like Jiva, He is un- 
associated (bliss) and intelligence.* 

106. But it may be asked, if Iswara is thus unconditioned 

* It remains to be observed that there is a marked similarity 
between Sankhya and Yoga in regard to Jiva ; for as the former 
holds him to be unrelated, self-illuminated, uniform, and intelli 
gence, so does the latter ; and he is an enjoyer only, but no agent 
or instrument. Now such an experience of his enjoyment follows 
from want of discrimination, for happiness and misery are the 
attributes of the internal organ whose function is intellection, 
(Boodhi), in connection with which, he is apt to be attributed the 
power of enjoying, and that Boodhi (spiritual soul or intellection) 
is the agent ; from similar want of discrimination, self is practically 
regarded as an agent, and so long as the intellect is not cleansed 
by the practice of the two varieties of meditation called sampra- 
jnata and asamprajnata or better still, the conscious and uncons 
cious varieties of the Vedantin, misery cannot be completely 
extirpated ; but when these medititations have thoroughly ripened, 
then Jiva is roused to his sense, he has now got discrimination 
wherewith to keep misery at bay, and this extreme destruction of 
misery is called emancipation in Yoga. Sankhya does not admit 
Iswara, but Yoga does, and that Iswara is like Jiva unrelated 
or unassociated [uncondioned] Intelligence. 


or unassociated intelligence, how can then he be the controller ? 
The reply is, that does not imply any contradiction, it is quite 
possible for his being a particular person and a controller, 
otherwise there will be no regulation of bondage and eman 
cipation. [That is to say as a king rewards a person for good 
and punishes for bad deeds, in the absence of Iswara as such 
a controller, a bad man be released while a good subjected to 
re-birth, and thus the inevitable law of Karma will be set at 

107. And the testimony of the Sruti likewise goes to 
establish his control. As for instance. " From his fear the 
wind moves and the sun shines." If it be asked how is he 
unrelated ? " This Supreme Self for an absence of pain,* 
works, etc., the usual atributes or perquisites of a Jiva, is like 
wise a controller." And there are arguments and (good) 
reasons for it. 

108. Moreover if Jiva be likewise devoid of pain what 
constitutes the distinction of Iswara ? So long as there is a want 
of discrimination, a person is apt to consider himself as subject 
to grief ; as has already been said. ( Vide ante V. /<?o.) 

109. With a view of establishing a difference between 
Iswara and Jiva, a Tarkika (Naiyayika) says, Iswar s three 
qualities, intelligence, endeavour, and will are eternal, and his 
unassociated control is unsound and objectionable. 

no. And adduce the testimony of the Sruti in sup 
port: His desire is eternal, his determination actuates him 
always and knows no rest." In this manner, the eternal 
nature of his qualities are sought to be established.! 

* There are five sorts of pain : 

(a). An Identity of sight and seer, (/;) Ardent desire for 
happiness and objects tending to it, (c) Pain produced from 
material objects, (d) Fear of death, and (e) Eagerness for the 
preservation of the body. 

f In such an admission of the eternal intelligence, etc., of 
Iswara there will be created a discrepancy with the Sruti texts 


in. The opinion held by the worshippers of Hirany- 
garbha (Brahma) is now being cited. They say, if Isvvara be 
regarded as eternally intelligent, etc., the work of creation 
will be continued for all time, hence Hiranyagarbha who is 
the collective totality of subtle bodies is Iswara. 

112. In spite of his having the subtle body, he is not a 
Jiva, because he is devoid of actions ; and because in the 
Udgita Brahmana his glory has been fully declared, [he is 
therefore Iswara.] 

113. As there can be no perception of the subtle without 
the gross physical body, therefore a worshipper of Vishnu 
says : Virat is called Iswara for the conceit that he is the 
collective aggregate of gross bodies and is always possessed 
of head, etc., [and of divers forms]. 

114. And cite in support "That he has thousand feet, 
thousand hands, and an equal number of heads and eyes." 

115. If an immense number of hands and feet were to 
constitute Iswara, a centipide may with equal propriety be 
called so. Therefore abstain from calling Virat to be Iswara 
but look upon Brahma as so ; and beyond him, there is no 
other Iswara, for none else has the power of creating subjects. 

116. Those who are desirous of issue and large progeny 
worship Brahma, and regard him as Iswara ; for the Sruti 
says " Prajapati (Brahma) creates all subjects." 

117. But a worshipper of Vishnu says since Brahma had 
his origin from a lotus, and that was the navel of Vishnu, 
consequently the latter pre-existed him, hence he is the father 
and therefore Iswara, and not Brahma. 

where it is mentioned, " With the creation of the Universe, arose 
the .intelligence of Iswara" as also such other texts which expound 
the view of non-duality. Hence it is easy to infer, with every show 
of reason, that the words true desire, etc., cited by a TarkiUa, 
mean a duration extending to cyclic periods of destruction and 
not to eternity. 


nS. A Shivite says his own deity is Iswan, because 
Vishnu could not ascertain where the legs of Shiva were 

119. A follower of Ganesa takes objection to the recog 
nition of Shiva as Iswara, for he had himself to worship 
Ganpat for conquering Tripur to avoid disaster ; therefore 
Ganesa is Iswara. 

120. In the same way, there are others who show a bais 
for their own deities whom they call Iswara; by the help of 
the (Mantras) sacred formulae used in their respective 
worship, they seek to establish the truth of their assertion, as 
also by an analysis and argument of their meaning and by a 
reference to Kalpa [a complete cycle of four Yugas~\. 

121. From the internal knower to inanimate objects all 
are equally denominated Iswara, inasmuch as even trees for 
instance, \\\t ficus reltgiosa, ashpias gigantea, and bamboo are 
objects of worship with men. 

122. In order to ascertain the correctness of the several 
views held concerning Iswara, by the different sects of wor 
shippers, it is said, with the help of analogy and analysis of 
the arguments used in the Shasiras, a wise and tranquil person 
hns no difficulty in differentiating Iswara from the rest and 
ascertaining him as secondless. This will be shewn in the 

123. The testimony of the Sru/ion this subject is to the 
following effect : " Know then Prakriti is Maya and Iswara 
is the particular person endowed with it." " All objects 
which ramify the universe have sprung from him." [That is 
to say, Matter is the proximate cause of the universe, and the 
Internal Knower associated with it is the Supreme Iswara, 
the instrumental cause abiding in Maya.} And all objects 
whether sentient or otherwise which fill the universe are said 
to be derived from Iswara, inasmuch as the same matter which 
forms a feature in Iswara is equally present in the rest 


124. And inasmuch as all contradictions are cleared by 
the Sru/ttext just referred above, the different worshippers of 
inanimate and animate bodies can have no further cause of 

125. And as Illusion (matter) is said in the Nirsimha 
Tapani to be full of darkness, (ignorance), and experienced 
by all beings, such experience is a proof of its existence, as 
has been over and over mentioned in the Sruti* 

126. And its (Maya or Prakrit? s) action is described in 
the Sruti to be insentient and fascinating. It likewise 
establishes its property of darkness as proved from individual 
experience, in the following wise. "The action of Maya is 
both insentient and fascinating." " It is infinite." Now this 
infinite nature of Matter establishes its universal presence, as 
we actually find on appealing to the experience of all persons, 
both young and old, men and women alike. 

127. Insentiency refers to want of intelligence. As for 
instance a jar. Fascination is described as what cannot be 
grasped by intellect; that is to say, what the intellect fails to 
comprehend. [It is that spiritual ignorance which leads men 
to believe in the reality of world and to addict themselves to 
mundane or sensual enjoyments.] 

128. If it be said, for the universal pervasion of Maya, 
and its property of darkness or ignorance being an estab 
lished fact according to individual experience, it is doubtful 
whether it is capable of being removed or destroyed by 
knowledge. For such a purpose the conclusion of the Sruti, 
and an analysis of the arguments used for and against, is cited 
to lead to the inference of its indescribable nature. Refer 
ring to this the Sruti says. "It is neither being nor non-being-, 

* We are all equally ignorant of something or other, and 
when asked about a thing we know not, we declare our ignorance. 
Ignorance is universally present, and its existence needs no other 
proof than our individual experience. This is what is meant. 



etc." And what is neither being nor non-being is indes 

129. It cannot be termed non-existent, for it is 
experienced everywhere by all alike ; nor existent, as it i* 
capable of being destroyed by knowledge; but as something 
worthless from the standpoint of knowledge. 

130. Thus it can be described in three separate ways : 

(a) In the light of knowledge it is something worthless.* 

(b) From the standard of logical inference, it is indescri 

(c) And according to the standard of ordinary percep 
tion it is really existent. 

131. And as by spreading a picture, all its figures arc 
rendered plainly visible, so the apparent existence of the world 
is due to Maya; with its destruction by knowledge, pheno 
mena are reduced to the condition of non-reality, just as the 
figures in the painting disappear when it is rolled up. 

132. In the Sru/i, Maya is described as both independent 
and dependent ; but to apply such opposite conditions to one 
and same substance, may appear contradictory, hence it is 
explained in the following wise : Since Maya cannot be 
conceived or realized as a separate entity without intelligence, 
consequently it is said to be dependent, and inasmuch as it 
affects the unassociated intelligence it is therefore free : 

133. It has the faculty of rendering the uniform unasso 
ciated intelligence of Self insentient and making him appear 
totally bereft of intelligence ; and through the reflex intelli 
gence it seeks to create difference between Jiva and Iswara. 

134. It may be asserted, if Self who is ever uniform and 
knows no change be thus affected by Maya, then this trans- 

* The word worthless requires to be explained. What does 
not exist always in all the three conditions of time is called so. 
The three conditions or divisions of time are waking, dreaming, 
and profound dreamless slumber. 


formation would indicate change. The reply is, Maya 
destroys his unchangeable and uniform nature and discovers 
the phenomenal world in him and this is nothing astonish 
ing for it. 

135. Like the solvent property of water, heat of fire and 
hardness of stone, transformation is naturally present in 

136. So long as a person is not disenchanted of its spells, 
he is apt to be filled with wonder concerning it ; but when he 
has come to know of Iswara, the controller of Maya, his 
wonders cease and he regards it as something unreal and 

137. To a Naiyayika and others like him, who believe in 
the reality of the objective world, this is applicable ; and not 
to a Vedantin, for he believes in the unreality of Maya. 

138. And with a view of shewing the uselessness of mul 
tiplying questions, the necessity is pointed out of cultivating 
knowledge wherewith to destroy Maya, and this is what an 
intelligent person should do. 

140. Thus then, destruction of Maya is proper for all 
persons, and there is no necessity for ascertaining its nature ; 
but there are men who would dissent to it, and say, it is 
proper that one should know what Maya is ; hence it is said, 
"Ascertain its indication as known to all men." 

141. And that indication is what cannot be ascertained 
exactly, though palpably present and manifested. Like a 
magical performance every thing that is presented to your 
sight appears real while the fact is otherwise ; and Maya is 
known to all men in that manner an illusion. How then 
can you ascertain its nature ? 

142. And phenomena are said to be a product of Maya, 
for, in spite of our diligent investigations we sadly fail to 
ascertain the exact nature of any one thing ; hence free your 
self from all bias and say whether it is possible to ascertain 
the nature of Maya. 


143. If all the learned men were to join in investigating 
the nature of a single entity out of the many, which fill this 
universe, they are sure to declare their ignorance somehow or 
other, and will fail to ascertain it. 

144. For instance, if you ask them how does a drop of 
semen produce the human body with all its organs? Whence 
does Intelligence come and why ? What will be their reply. 

145. If they were to say, it is the very nature of semen 
to produce a body and its organs, we may pause to enquire, 
How did they know it ? And point out the instance of 
sterile women who conceive not ; consequently semen is not 
naturally possessed with such a propeity. 

146. So that, ultimately they come to ackowledge their 
ignorance ; for this reason, the wise regard both ignorance 
and its product, the material world, in the light of a magical 
performance ; they are so to speak a phantasm. 

147. What can be more magical than human conception ? 
A drop of semen entering the uterus, vivified by intelligence, 
develops hands, head, feet, etc., in due order ; gradually 
attains to childhood, youth and old age, is subjected to 
various diseases, and sees, hears, smells, enjoys and progresses 
to and fro. 

148. Nor is this confined to man alone. For in the case 
of the ficus religiosa and other gigantic trees springing from 
very minute and insignificant seeds, the same Maya is like 
wise displayed. Look at the tree and the seed which gave it 1 
birth, and can you cease to wonder? Therefore by constant 
practice inure your mind into a belief of the magical property 
of Maya, and look upon it as something equally in 

149- A Naiyayika believes, he alone is capable of satis 
factorily explaining phenomena and is proud of it. Let him 
consult the Khandana of Sri Harsha Acharya and he will 
find his position to be no longer maintainable. 

150. For what is inconceivable, cannot be ascc uincd 


by any end of argument, therefore it is improper to connect 
this inconceivable world with argument even in mind. 

151. Consider the source of the world, which is cons 
tructed in a manner quite impossible to conceive, and of 
which no definite idea can be formed, to be Maya, which hath 
for its cause the Secondless, Impartite Intelligence (Brahma) 
experienced in profound slumber. 

152. This world which is nothing else but only a con 
dition of waking and dreaming [a day dream] merges into 
its source Maya which continues in profound slumber ; just 
as a tree abides in its seed. Since therefore Maya is the 
source of the universe, all impressions derived from a know 
ledge of phenomena are centred in it. 

153. Like the ether or space appropriated by cloud, there 
is a dim perception of reflection of intelligence in all impres 
sions derived from knowledge and this is known inferentially. 
[But it may be said, it is possible to perceive the presence of 
water in cloud, for water is nothing else but drops of moisture 
collected in the cloud, in which again, ether is plainly 
conceivable, because of the ether present in a jar filled with 
water, which is identical with the water of the clouds ; conse 
quently the presence of the first is easily deducible as an 
inference from the palpable instance of the second. And it is 
difficult to see how can the example of cloud-ether apply to 
reflection of intelligence included in all impressions of 
phenomena. To clear it out and shew the applicability of the 
example, it is said that the reflex intelligence seed of matter- 
is known inferentially]. 

154. That reflection of intelligence is subsequently trans 
formed into intellect, hence it is plainly discerned in Boodhi. 
In other words, Ignorance endowed with reflected intelligence 
modified or transformed into intellect, forms the subject of 
the reflection of intelligence ; under such circumstances, the 
impression of prior perceptions in the intellect, which is a 
subject of contention, can be reckoned as a reflection of 


intelligence, and for its being a modification, form, or condi 
tion of Boodhi, may be likened to its function. 

155. " Maya and reflection of intelligence in it, constitute 
both Jiva and Iswara"* (Sruti). But then it may be 
remarked, How can their invisibility and visibility be deter, 
mined if they are thus similar. To establish that difference, it 
is said : Like the difference existing between ether present 
in cloud and water respectively, the knowledge of the Jiva for 
its being enveloped in ignorance is dimly discernible ; while 
that of Iswara for the associate of Intellect is plainly 
manifested. Herein consists the practical difference of the two. 
In other words, the one Impartite Intelligence is through 
Illusion differentiated into Jiva and Iswara. 

156. Similitude of Iswara with cloud-ether is established 
in the following wise : Maya resembles the cloud, for as in 
cloud, it is natural to expect subtle particles of rain collected 
in the form of moisture, so are intellect and knowledge 
derived from past impressions present in Maya ; and like the 
presence of the reflection of ether in that water, there Is 
reflection of intelligence in Maya] that is Iswara. Thus then 
we find, like the space or ether appropriated by cloud and 
water respectively, both Jiva and Iswara rest on Maya and 

* Pundit Pitambarjee the author of the well-known Bombay 
Edition of Mr. Sheriff Mahomed, says in his notes, it is not to 
be construed that Jiva and Iswara are the active products of Maya. 
That is not meant here, for he says Jiva, Iswara, Intelligence 
perse, Ignorance (Avidya) or nescience, and the relation of the 
two last, together with the subsisting difference of each of the 
five, these six substances are naturally uncreate and without an 
origin ; and the statement of the Bartikkar is directly opposed to 
the Sidhanta, and the Sruti text " Maya with reflexion makes 
Jiva and Iswara." 

Here the verb to make likewise establishes Maya ; for its 
successful dependence shows or produces Jiva and Iswara. This 
is what is meant. 


reflex Intelligence ; because like water present in the cloud, 
there is present knowledge derived from memory in Maya, 
and like the reflection of ether in that water, Iswara rests in 
the form of reflex intelligence.* 

* It would appear from the text that Vidyaranya Swami means 
Iswara to be the reflection [of intelligence] in past perception 
originating from or by the intellect, but doubts may be entertained 
as to the truth of such an assertion, and they are cleared in the 
following manner. In the first place, it may be enquired whether 
the associate of Iswara is only Ignorance, or Ignorance with 
knowledge of prior impressions, or the latter only. If the first 
point be held, then the resemblance of Iswara with the reflected 
shadow of intelligence in Ignorance and knowledge of past 
perceptions of the intellect will create a discord. Similarly the 
recognition of the second view will require an admission of 
ignorance only as the associate of Iswara. In that case, he can 
lay no claim to omniscience ; hence it is necessary for preserving 
his omniscience to consider knowledge and intellect as predicates 
of ignorance. But to say so is quite contradictory. Because the 
satavic particle of Ignorance can only naturally have the property 
of all-knowingness, for Satwa is light, consequently if knowledge 
and intellect are viewed in the same light as predicates of intelli 
gence, there will be a perfect absence of omniscience, hence their 
presence is quite futile and unnecessary. If we pause to enquire 
into the reason why, we shall find one variety of knowledge 
cannot possibly take cognisance of, or embrace all objects or 
things, but on the other hand, for the acquirement of omniscience 
all knowledges must be admitted as the predicate of ignorance, 
which again cannot be expected to disappear in any one time 
save that of pralaya, consequently it is not for establishing 

In the same way, the second view that of intellect and know 
ledge with ignorance as the associate of Iswara is quite untenable. 
Then again, those who assert knowledge only is the associate of 
Iswara, it may be asked of them. Whether Iswara is the 
reflected shadow in such individual unit of knowledge produced 
from memory ? Or in its collective aggregate ? If they maintain 


157. "And that reflex intelligence dependent on 

or subservient to it, full of illusion, is the Supreme Iswara, 
Internal Knower, Omniscient, and the Universal Cause." 

158. Beginning with the blissful sheath in the state of 
profound slumber, the Sruti says " That blissful sheath is the 
Lord of all." Therefore the Vedas denote it to be Iswara. 

[But objection may be taken to it, for in waking and 
dreaming, the predicate of the grosser condition of 
materiality with the reflected shadow the internal organ is 
called the cognitional sheath. The knowing or cognitional 
Jiva merges into a subtle condition in profound slumber (and 
that is the blissful) which if regarded as Iswara, then in the 
absence of that merging of the internal organ in waking and 
dreaming conditions into the state of blissfulness, there will 
be a corresponding want of Iswara too. Then again, there 
must be as many Iswaras as there are men in profound 
slumber, and as there are five such sheaths or sacs recognised 
in the human body by all authors, the admission of blissful 
as Iswara will render the utterances concerning the rest un 
necessary and futile; hence it is said, the Blissful sac is not 
Iswara. This is what a Prabhakar says, but it is cleared 

the first mentioned opinion, then as knowledge originating from 
the individual s intellect is infinite in variety, Iswara for his being 
the reflected shadow in each unit of such knowledge must 
necessarily be infinite in number, and as each knowledge is 
parviscient, the reflected shadow in it will also necessarily be 
parviscient. Then again, in regard to the second opinion of 
Iswara as the reflected shadow in the collective aggregate of all 
knowledges it is necessary to mention, that save and during the 
pralayic period it can never be and that in proportion to the 
number of associates there is a similar number of reflected 
shadows, consequently there cannot be one reflected shadow in all 
knowledges. Thus then, Ignorance alone is the associate of 


thus: If a dull person would receive no benefit from 
ascertaining the indication of the transcendental phrase, it is 
better that he should consider and ponder well on the meaning 
of Om, as laid down in the Mandukya Upanishad, where like 
wise the Blissful sheath is mentioned, the Omniscient and 
Universal Lord. Now as the above Upanishad had its object 
in so saying, to establish non-duality, similarly our author had 
been actuated to establish the oneness of Jiva and Iswara. 
He had no desire to make the Blissful/ Iswara; for it will 
be found elsewhere in a subsequent part of the work (Sect. 
XI) that He terms the Blissful as a particular condition of 
the individual. Therefore, only with the view of establishing 
non-duality to persons of dull intellect, that the Blissful sheath 
is here referred to as Iswara, otherwise there will be a con 
tradiction between what is stated here and in the above 

159. It is not impossible for the Blissful sheath* to have 
omniscience and a paramount control over all, nor is it 
proper that this should create any dispute or contention ; for 
the utterances of the Sruti are beyond cavil and dispute, and 
they tend that way. Then again, concerning Maya it is said, 
every thing is possible. [That is to say, it is the nature of 
illusion to create unreal, real ; like things shown in a perform 
ance of magic.] 

160. But as the utterances of the Sruti in the absence of 
supporting arguments to establish their truth may be set at 
naught like the expression " a boat made of stone" they are 
now being cited : Since there is no one capable of undoing 
the creation of Iswara He is called the Lord Paramount. 
That is to say, what is created by Iswara, the objective world 
and the rest, cannot be destroyed in any manner, hence he is 
the Paramount or Supreme Lord. 

161. His omniscience is established in the following wise : 
The perception [conception] of all beings originating from 
their intellect rests in ignorance in the condition of profound 



slumber, and by that conception makes the whole universe its 
subject; and for its being the associate of ignorance, the 
predicate of perception proceeding from intellect (the blissful 
sheath) is said to be all-knowing.* 

162. But then it may be asked, if it is all-knowing what 
prevents our experiencing it ? Therefore it is said : As 
intellectual impressions, associate of that blissful (Isvvara) are 
invisible, hence his all-knowingness is not perceived. How is 
it then known ? From their presence in all intellects, conclude 
omniscience to be present, inasmuch as they are only a product 
of intellect which is their cause and whose property it is to- 
create perception. In the same way as the property of yarn 
the cause of a cloth is present in its product, the cloth. 

163. The blissful " Iswara is the internal knower." Sruti. 
Because resting inside the cognitional and other sacs, and in 
every other thing besides, he employs them in due order. 

164. Regarding Iswara as the internal knower the 

Antaryami Brahman of Brihadaranyaka Upamshad says : 

" Residing in the intellect, yet he is different from it, nor can he 
be seen by that intellect, which constitutes his physical body, 
and of which he is the internal controller." In this manner 
Iswara is mentioned in the Vcdas. 

165. Now from a fear of its lengthiness I refrain from 
entering into an explanation of all the indications cited in the 
Antaryami Brahman, but will content myself with " Who 
resides in all elements" and illustrate it by an example. As 
yarn constitutes the proximate or formal cause of a cloth and 
rests in it, so is Iswara the formal cause of all elements and 
rests in them. 

1 66. But the question is, If Iswara is the formal cause 
why is He unseen ? The reply is, what is most intrinsically 

> The reader need not be reminded what the blissful sheath 
means after what has been said in Verse 158 and note. It refers 
to Iswara. Therefore, plainly speaking, it is meant here to shew 
Iswara is omniscient. 


situated cannot be seen. As for instance, the threads of a 
cloth are internal, and their filaments are internal to them ; 
so where that intrinsicality finally rests consider that to be the 
the Iswara. 

167. Thus for His being most intrinsically situated he 
cannot be seen, because he is formless ; and of concentric 
intrinsicalities only two or three comparatively external are 
capable of being determined by the sight, but as he is inner 
most He is hence unseen, and can only be ascertained by 
Sruti texts and proofs derived from analogy. 

168. "The elements form that Iswara s body" is thus 
explained. As after yarn has been turned into a cloth the 
body of yarn is the cloth, similarly for Iswara s residing every 
where in all objects, the objective world is His body. 

169. * Who resides internally in all objects, controls 
and employs them." This passage is illustrated by example 
in the following manner. As by contracting or expanding 
the threads, [of which a cloth is made] or shaking them, etc., 
the cloth must of necessity be similarly affected, and there 
is not the slightest mark by which the cloth can show its 
distinction ; 

170. So this internal knower Iswara has been transformed 
according to the impulse of his desires. That is to say, this 
objective world, has been produced through his consciousness, 
and a cow, horse, man, mountain, river, and an infinite variety 
of objects which fill the universe are changed conditions of 
Him, and they are necessarily His works. 

171. After having explained the Sruti text referring to 
Iswara as an internal knower, the evidence of the Gita is now 
cited. Krishna says to Arjuna " Iswara* is situated in the 

* Says the Commentator of the Bombay Edition. The word 
Iswara is a singular noun of the first declension, hence Ha is 
one and not many; consequently as an internal knower He is one 
and not many as asserted by the followers of Vishnu Swami. 


heart of All elementary bodies, and mounted on the mechanism 
of that organ makes all the elements wander through illusion " 
[Chap. XVIII, v. 51.] 

They assert that as caste is singular number, for it is a collective 
noun, so Iswara for His being situated inside all hearts, may be 
taken as a collective noun of the singular number : but this does 
not hold true; for Iswara is never regarded in that light either 
in the Srrtti, Smrifi, or the Puranas; no where is He mentioned 
except as one ; popular experience alike tends that way. Hence 
it is impossible to construe Him into a collective noun. Then 
again, if Iswara were so many distinct as there are individuals, 
there will be created a discord in the harmony of nature! 
for each Iswara dwelling inside each individual will refuse 
to be acted upon by the same natural laws which may affect 
another person and vice versa. To be more explicit, the pre 
sence of many Iswaras in one universe will create discord by a 
difference of desires in them, one may be actuated with a wish 
to create, another to destroy, and so the two will be acting in 
the extreme ends, consequently synchcronism, and order will be 
upset. But it may be alleged, like a king having several servants 
there needs be no discord ; for several Iswaras are all particles 
of the secondless Supreme Iswara, a form of Brahma and con 
trolled by it. It may be asked of those who entertain this view 
whether that Supreme Iswara is endowed with or without almighti- 
ness and omniscience ? If the reply be in the affirmative, then the 
necessity of several Iswaras is clearly done away with ; for as 
an internal knower, one Iswara is quite capable of controlling all 
beings, and almightiness gives him that power. If on the other 
hand, the reply be in the negative, then Jiva will be without an 
Iswara. Thus then Iswara is one and not many. But objec 
tion may be taken in quite another form and the authority of 
Vachaspaty may be cited in support of his multiformness. Now 
this is clearly a mistake, for Vachaspati with the view of establish 
ing non -duality and explaining it to one desirous of release, brings 
in the help of illusory attribution and its recession or withdrawal 
in that way. He has no other object. 


172. The phrase " All the elements" in the above extract 
from the Gita is thus explained. It refers to Jiva who is the 
cognitional sac, and which cognition resides in the lotus of the 
heart. With the view of explaining the reason why that cogni 
tion is to reside in the heart, it is said : -the internal knower 
[Iswara] is transformed into the shape of the cognitional sac, 
and resides in the heart ; Iswara, the Blissful sheath is the 
proximate cause of Jiva, the cognitional, and in regard to the 
heart is modified or changed in the form of that cognitional 

[If we pause to enquire in to the drift of the text we shail 
find, the heart regarded as the centre of life. It is likewise 
mentioned as an organ, Iswara being most intrinsically 
situated resides inside the heart where He is transformed into 
cognition, intelligence or life, from His original state of bliss- 
fulness. Western physiology knows nothing or next to no 
thing about the heart, beyond its capacity of a forcing pump 
drawing the blood out and distributing it into the arterial 
channels. Popular literature assigns affection to the heart, and 
the exploded dogma of an antiquated and unscientific religion 
looks upon it as conscience, but nowhere is the slightest 
mention made of its being the tabernacle of Iswara or seat of 
cognition or knowledge in the abstract.] 

173. The words mounted mechanism and wander are 
thus explained. Mechanism indicates the physical body and 
the conceit that it is my body is expressed by the word 
mounted ; inclination for lawful or prohibited action is to 

174. Jiva when influenced by the inherent force of Maya, 
begets an inclination for works lawful or interdicted, and 
attributes them to Self thus changing him into an agent and 
instrument. This is called wandering in [the meshes of] 

175. The world controller already mentioned \ante V. 
164), also bears a similar signification to that of wandering as 


mentioned in the Sruti. Therefore follow the method laid 
down in reference to controller and through the help of 
your intellect apply it also to the world and all its contents. 
[In short recognise the presence of that internal knower Iswara 
in the universe and all its contents.] 

176. Inclination for lawful actions though they are the 
means of virtue I have none, nor have I abstained from 
prohibited works knowing them to cause the production of 
sin, but moved as I am by the internal knower residing within 
me and in the way engaged by him, so do I act. 

177. But in such a consideration of dependence of 
inclination on Iswara, there will be a consequent uselessness 
of the usual incentives [endeavour] to actions good and bad ; 
hence to avoid it, it is said, you are not to conclude that 
nothing depends upon the individual s endeavour as far as the 
doing of actions or their reverse are concerned ; for Iswara 
is modified or changed in the shape of what a person is 
capable of doing, therefore everywhere the individual s 
endeavour is the chief cause of all works. 

178. Though therefore Iswara is modified in the form of 
the individual s endeavour, yet it does not set aside, his 
control, for when that control is fully realised, the unassociated 
blissfulness of self is easy to be conceived of, by the Jiva. 

179. " That helps and brings about his emancipation" so 
says the Sruti, Smriti, etc. And these Sacred Scriptures have 
been set down as the commandments of Iswara. 

1 80. Since the Sruti mentions^" To break His commands 
is hurtful and injurious," it is therefore plain enough that 
apart from His being the internal knower, He is the Supreme 
Lord. The Sruli says the commandments of Iswara are a 
cause of fear " The wind moves actuated by the fear of the 
Lord, etc.," hence for a fear of breaking His commands which 
in its turn is hurtful and produces sin, it is sought here to 
establish a difference between the internal knower and the 
Supreme Lord ; and that difference is marked by the source 


of fear as above mentioned, which is said to constitute the 
characterising feature of the Supreme Lord. 

181. Two examples are cited from the Sruti to show 
the control exercised by Iswara both externally and internally 
" By His command the sun and moon etc." "The Supreme 
Self (Paramalma) having entered inside [of all beings] con 
trols them." 

182. This " Supreme Self is the Cause" of the universe. 
Another passage quoted from the Sruti is now being explained. 
In regard to the source of objective world the Shastras say, 
" He is the source from which the elements take their origin 
and is the cause of their destruction ;" consequently Iswara 
for His being the creator and destroyer is the cause of this 
material world. And this evolution and destruction are 
admitted to take place in a consecutive order. 

183. The subject is further illustrated by reference to an 
example. As by spreading a picture we bring out the several 
figures and other objects painted there, and present them to 
our view, so during the periods of evolutional activity, or say 
creation, all material objects are produced by Iswara. 

184. And as in a rolled up picture all the figures are 
shut out of sight, so Iswara with the view of consummating 
the actions of all individuals [virtually extinguishing them 
from bearing any more fruits] draws the objective word within 
Him during periods of cyclic destruction [when they continue 
in a state of rarefied potentiality to be reproduced when the 
dawn of creation approaches.]* 

* Pralaya and Mahapralaya are made to signify partial and 
total destruction respectively. In regard to the latter, opinions 
are divided. For instance, Sankhyakar, Gautama, the author of 
Naya Sutras, alike deny total destruction which they say to be 
a myth. The philosophy of Cosmosgony had no where engaged 
abler intellects than in India. Our ancient Rishis had to a great 
extent solved the mystery more satisfactorily and scientifically 
than the savants of Europe, and we challenge enquiry. But the 


185. Now this being and nor.. being or appearance and 
disappearance of creation and destruction of the world is 

views they entertain have not been thoroughly explained, hence 
interested motivei and Missionary zeal had been co-operating 
to class them amongst the fabulous creations of a mytholic age. 
Happily the position is quite altered now, and as there is a desire 
of accepting truth even from an enemy s camp we subjoin the 
following explanation. Brahma, the creator has a lifetime of 
hundred years. But that period covers an immensity of time 
which staggers imagination ; and on comparative analysis with 
the evidence forthcoming from a study of the earth s crust and 
its strata, the facts disclosed by Aryan researches fit nicely into 
the blank niches left unfinished by geology. For instance, accord 
ing to the Surya Siddhanta we find it laid down that immediately 
with the advent of Brahma on the scene, the work of creation did 
not commence, the fiat of a personal creator s ordering " Let the 
waters recede and land appear," arid so on after that fashion is 
never allowed here. The primary period occupied Brahma for 
five millions, six hundred, sixty-six thousand years, before he was 
in a position to begin his work. All this time, the earth was 
passing through the several geological epochs, its crust was 
solidifying or otherwise undergoing the requisite changes to ren 
der it fit for life to appear. And if it be remembered that a day 
of Brahma is equal to 14 Manantwaras or Afanus, and a night 
of equal length, that gives us a period covered by four thousand 
human Yugas or one thousand eighty-four Mahayugas, one of 
which lasts for 4,320,000. Therefore (4,321,000 x 1084)2 Brahma s 
day and night of 24 hours. This multiplied by 100 will give the 
period he is to live. He has passed over six Manantwaras and 
is in the middle of the seventh, so that if 24 Manu constitute the 
period of his day, he must necessarily be near 12 o clock noon of 
the very first day, and after another such period there will follow 
night, when there will be a pralaya, again to disappear with the 
-dvent of dawn. This is the rule. After 100 years Brahma also is 
swallowed up in the universal destruction and Iswara and the rest 
are all gone, leaving the One Life, PARABRAHMA above mentioned. 
This is a long account of evolution as understood amongst us. 


Illustrated further by comparing them to night and day, 
profound slumber and waking, opening and shutting of the 
eyelids, contentment and distraction of the mind. Like these 
several conditions the resemblance between destruction and 
creation is -complete. 

186. But it may be asked whether Iswara as a creative 
source of the world is its instrumental or modifying cause ? 
Both these views do not apply to the conclusions which have 
been here maintained. For Iswara has a requisite force [in 
the form of Maya] wherewith to create and destroy, [and as 
He is secondless and formless He is neither an instrument nor 
a modifying cause of the world.] For what is formless cannot 
be modified into something else of a different shape and form, 
and what is secondless cannot be regarded as an instrument 
er beginner.* 

* The word beginner requires an explanation. Its Sanskrit 
equivalent Arambhaka or Arambhakarta can only be satisfact 
orily accounted for in this manner. When from a combination 
of several causes, there results a product entirely different in 
shape and form from them, for a connection of parts with the 
whole, it is called Arambhavada. As for instance by combining 
either half of a pitcher, is produced a jar which is entirely differ 
ent in shape from that half. Here the material cause does not 
leave its own shape, but a thing is produced different from that 
cause ; or as from a combination of one filament with another of 
thread, a fine thread is produced out of which is produced a cloth ; 
here also the difference between the cause and its product, cotton- 
thread and cloth is admitted ; now such a view of beginning in 
regard to the origin of the world by Brahma is inapplicable, in 
asmuch as It is secondless and there is a want of an action or 
product different from It. Then again, if the theory of beginning 
were to hold good, subsequent to the production of an action, its 
cause, which is different from such product, continuing present in 
the same state, must require in regard to one cause the beginning 
of several products as actions. Hence the view of a Naiyayika 
[Arambhavada] is inconsistent. 



187. Now Iswara is secondless, how can then He be the 
natural cause of both the sentient and insentient ? The reply 
is, His associate of Maya is the cause of insentient as the 
reflection of intelligence is that of sentient creatures. 

1 88. Objection may be taken in regard to Iswara, who 
is endowed with Maya, as the cause of the universe. For 
Sureswar Acharya (Vartikkar) distinctly attributes to the 
Supreme Self such causation. In this way, does a dissenter 
speak in this and the following verse. The Supreme Self 
associated with Maya abounding in darkness or insentiency 
is the cause of body, while for his preponderance of intelli 
gence, and according to the conception, knowledge and merits 
or de-merits of individuals which form the instrumental cause 
of their origin, that Self is the cause of both sentient and 
insentient objects. In short He is the Universal Cause. 

189. In the above manner Vartikkara says, "The Supreme 
Self and not Iswara is the universal cause of both sentient 

Now between the modifying cause and its resulting product 
there is said to be no difference. As for instance, clay modified 
into a jar, internal organ modified in the form of its function, and 
the modification of Prakriti into Mahatatwa (according to San- 
khya). It is a fact well-known that phenomena are regarded only 
as another form of matter by Kapila and his followers. Then 
again, there are others who consider it to be only another modifi 
cation of Brahma ; but how can that be ? For the world is 
material and Brahma immaterial; the former is insentient, the 
latter intelligence; the first is non-eternal and the last eternal. 
Thus then, if it were a modification of intelligence, that is to say, 
a changed form of it, intelligence will be destructible, for what is 
subject to change is always so. 

In regard to Vivaria Karana, it is alleged, when a cause pro 
duces a result without undergoing any change, as for instance, 
silver in nacre the faults and inconsistencies of the first two 
methods do not apply, and it is the accepted doctrine of the 
Vedanta for a solution of the Cosmos. 


and insentient." With the view of refuting it, our author 
says. Ye dissenters, hear what a Siddhanti has to say against 
ycur deduction. 

190. With a desire of establishing the signification of 
"That to include the Uniform Intelligence and things dis 
similar, attributed by illusion, like the signification of its 
complement Thou [of the phrase That art Thou" the 
Supreme Self is mentioned as the Universal Cause. This is 
untenable and rebutted by the Siddhanti . Here like Jiva 
and Uniform Intelligence (concerning the indication That ) 
Iswara endowed with Maya and Brahma and their mutual 
illusory attribution after having been established by Him, 
Sureswar Acharya expounds the Supreme Self as the Uni 
versal Cause. 

191. To this effect the Sruti mentions, "From the 
Supreme Brahrna which is truth, knowledge and bliss, have 
been derived ether, air, fire, water, earth, medicine, food- 
grains, and the physical body." 

192. But it may be asked wherein consists the allegation 
of mutual attribution through illusion in the passage above 
quoted ? It is therefore said, the attribution of casuation of 
the universe to Brahma having the indications of truth, know- 
lege and the rest, and the attribution of truth to the universal 
cause, the reflected intelligence inherent in Maya (that is 
Iswara) is due to a want of proper discrimination arising from 
the illusory attribution of one to the other. 

193. This mutual illusory attribution of one to the oiher 
has already been exemplified [ Vide ante V. 1-3, Chap. VI.], but 
is here again illustrated by reference to the starching of a 
piece of cloth : As in a cloth that has been starched, the 
stafch appears to be one with it, through mistake ; similarly 
the oneness of Iswara and Brahma or their mutual attribution 
of one another is due to illusion. 

194. As a person of dull intellect fails to discriminate the 
difference between the space appropriated by a cloud and the 


unappropriated infinite space [of which it is a part,] so do the 
ignorant conceive the oneness of Iswara and Brahma. 

195. But that difference can only be conceived by ascer 
taining the purport under the six features. These are : the 
beginning and the end, repetition, novelty, result, illustration 
by praise and by supporting argument.* If the purport of 
the Sru/: be determined in the above manner under the six 
methods cited, it will appear that Brahma is unassociated 
(unconditioned) while Iswara is the reflected shadow of in 
telligence in Maya. He is the creator of universe. 

196. In Sruti, the unconditioned nature of Brahma is 
plainly set forth in the beginning and end: for instance, 
in the beginning Brahma is described as " Truth, knowledge 
and infinite;" and in the conclusion, " Whom speech cannot 
grasp unspeakable. 1 

197. The nature of Iswara is now declared by referring 
to Sru/i text. "Maya is the creative source of the universe, 
it likewise is the cause of the individual s enthralment." [He 
is subject to bondage.] Hence Iswara endowed with predi 
cate of Maya is the creator, while the individual is a subject 
of metempsychosis. 

198. The mode in which creation of Iswara took place 
is now being declared. [From the standpoint of knowledge.] 
He desired to be manifold, and thus became the collective 
totality of subtle bodies Hiranyagarbhaf just as the pro 
found slumbering condition passes into dreams. 

* Says the Vedantasara : The commencement and the con 
clusion repetition, novelty, the result, illustration by praise and by 
supporting arguments are the means for determining the purport ; 
the reader is referred to DHOLE S Vedantasara, pp. 44-45. 

f The subtle astral body has one or several indications, accord 
ing to the manner of observing it collectively or individually like the 
wood and the reservior.or the tree and water considered before ; that 
is to say, cither it is the subject of one Intellect (Spiritual Intelli 
gence or Boodhi) or of several. In the former condition it is the 


199. From the two views expounded in Sruti, in regard 
to creation ; of consecutive serial production [as for instance, 
ether first, then air, fire, water, and earth] or their simulta 
neous beginning, not telling against one another, both of them 
are worth knowing ; in the same manner as dreams happen 
in both ways, consecutively and simultaneously. 

200. The nature of Hiranyagarbha is defined : For the 
conceit that he is the collective aggregate of subtle bodies, 
and pervading like a thread through all beings (called Thread- 
Soul) he is the predicate of desire, action, and intelligence 
of all individuals. 

201. As in the morning and evening twilight all objects 
partially covered by darkness can only be dimly perceived, 
so the objective world is but faintly apprehended in the 
Hiranyagarbha condition. 

202. As the sketch on a piece of canvas duly prepared 
with starch can only be plainly perceived when drawn with a 
crayon, so is the body of Iswara marked by the subtle astral 
body derived from non.quintuplication of elements. 

Thread-Soul or Sutratma, for it pervades like a thread through 
all created beings, and is the subjective Intelligence of Hiranya 
garbha, thus constituting a collective totality. In the latter or 
individual condition it is the special or separate intelligence of 
every living being. Consciousness associated with the collective 
totality of subtle astral bodies is known by the names of Sutratma 
(Thread-Soul), for it pervades through all such bodies like a 
thread, and Hiranyagarbha or Prana, for the conceit of its being 
the five great elements in a state of simple uncombination, with 
knowledge, will-force, and active energy for its attributes. It is 
the subtle body itself. Iswara associated with \Maya ] illusion 
abounding in pure goodness and for the conceit that He is the 
astral body is called Hiranyagarbha. Prajna associated with 
Ignorance abounding in impure goodness, for a similar conceit 
that he is the subtle astral body, is called Taijasa. Vide DHOLE S 
Vedantasara, p. 23. 


203. Like the tender stalks or leaflets of a seed that has 
germinated, this Hiranyagarbha is the tender seedling out of 
which is produced the universe. 

204. As in the full blaze of the sun all objects are plainly 
visible ; as the figures and trees and plants bearing fruits or 
sheaths of corn are rendered manifest, in a piece of painting 
filled with colour, so is this material world plainly manifested 
in Virat s condition. 

205. This Virat is mentioned in the fifth chapter of the 
Second Ashtaka of the Yajur Veda Sanhita and Purush Sukta. 
"From Brahma to the Turienne column all this universe is 
mentioned as constituting the shape and form of Virat. 

206. From the unanimous testimony of the different 
sects of worshippers this can be gleaned concerning the 
nature of Iswara [mentioned in Verses 202 208]. PVom the 
internal knower to a spade every object is fit to be worshipped 
as Iswara. [This is pointed out in this and the two following 
Verses.] The internal knower, Thread-Soul, Virat, Brahma, 
Vishnu, Siva, Fire, Ganesa, the king of difficulties, Vairab, 
Myral, Marika (goddess), Yaksha, and Rakshas ; 

207. Brahman, Kshetrya, Vaiswa, Sudra, cow, horse, deer, 
bird, the ficus religiosa and banyan, mangoe, barley, paddy, 
and grass ; 

208. Water, stone, earth, wood, an axe and spade, all 
these are Iswara, and to worship them is meritorious, for they 
yield good fruits. 

209. A person engaged in the worship of such objects 
derives benefit according to the mode of his worship ; and 
in proportion to the dignity of the object worshipped will be 
the measure of his reward. That is to say, the worshippers 
of low reptiles, or inanimate objects derive the least amount 
of benefit, while the higher divinities worshipped as Iswara 
bring forth the best results. 

210. But there is only one means for cutting off metem 
psychosis and getting emancipated, that is knowledge of 


Brahma; just as to keep away dreams one must necessarily 
keep himself awake, so by dispelling ignorance one is freed. 

211. All the phenomena which at present are discernible 
to us, from Iswara, Jiva, physical body, to animate and inani 
mate objects which go to make up the universe, all this is a 
dream for they are material in the light of knowledge of second- 
less Brahma. Brahma alone is real and the rest are im 
permanent, hence in regard to Brahma they are like objects 
seen in a dream. 

212. For Iswara (the blissful sheath) and Jiva (the cog- 
nitional sheath) are both contrived in Maya and from these 
two have been produced this universe. 

213. Of them which portion of creation is Iswara s and 
which belongs to Jiva is now being set forth according to the 
citation of Sruti. "From determination to entrance is 
Iswara s, and from the waking condition, etc., to emancipation 
is Jiva s." " The Supreme Iswara observed, certainly I have 
made the several abodes (with their adequate inhabitants food 
and drink) and have made my entrance in the body of the 
individual through the cranial aperture in the center." 

214. From a want of knowledge of non-duality about the 
oneness of Brahma and individual self* established in the 
Sruti, persons opposed to that doctrine or unacquainted with 
it are found engaged in disputing about Jiva and Iswara who 
are endowed with Maya and in vain. 

215. The sight of an emancipated person gives me 
pleasure, that of a worldly-minded person enquiring after self- 
knowledge excites my sympathy and makes me feel pity for 
him, but with those dull* dissenters who are ever entangled in 

* There are three grades of dullness, hence such persons are 
classified as either good, indifferent or bad. Those who have no 
faith in the teachings of the Shastras though they have a concep 
tion of their purport belong to the first class. Those having 
neither faith in, nor knowledge of, the Shastras and following the 


the meshes of error and know not the unassociated intelli* 
gence of the PARABRAHMA, I need not engage in any more 
wrangling about the real nature of Iswara and Jiva. 

216. From the worshippers of grass, trees, bricks to 
Yogachars, all of them are in error concerning the real 
nature of Iswara ; from the followers of Sankhya to those of 
Charvak (Lokayats) all are in error concerning the nature of 

217. For so long as there is no adequte knowledge of 
the Supreme Brahma, they are all entangled in error, and 
where is their happiness and deliverance? 

218. Though according to the dignity of their objects of 
worship, there is an appreciable difference amongst them, 
but of what benefit is it? Or as a kingdom obtained in a dream, 
or wealth acquired by begging in that condition is of not the 
slightest use when the dream is dispersed and the person 
awakes ; so do their respective devotion bring forth neither 
bliss nor emancipation from future re-births. 

219. Thus then, it is incumbent upon one desirous of 
release instead of engaging in fruitless disputes about Iswara, 
to ascertain the nature of Brahma, and to acquire that know 
ledge (which would procure deliverance to him.) 

220. If as a means of acquiring that knowledge [of self] 
it be necessary to begin with the nethermost rung of the 
ladder, with Jiva and Iswara, by all means do adopt that 
method, but beware of being entangled in endless disputes 
in your preliminary enquiry, and do not allow yourselves to 
lose sight of that one object, Brahma. 

221. If you contend that according to Sankhya Jiva is 
unassociated, pure intelligence, and Iswara is similarly men- 

bent of their wishes are indifferent ; while the third class include 
those who have a faith in the Shastras, but from ignorance act aa 
they choose. With persons of above description, the author 
writes, all disputes are useless. 


tinned in Yoga, or that the indication of That and Thou of 
the transcendental phrase "That art Thou," cited in Yoga- 
Shastra can be clearly ascertained to indicate Jiva and Iswara. 
The reply is, in spite of the oneness of properties both in 
Iswara and Jiva, Yoga Philosophy maintains an actual existing 
difference between the two, which is not the conclusion of our 
Vedanta. Do therefore listen : 

222. We (Vedantins) do sometimes avail ourselves of the 
indication of the two words That and Thou as a step for 
facilitating the comprehension of non-duality, otherwise they 
are not for establishing actually a difference in their significa 
tion. In other words, when they are spoken of separately as 
conveying each a separate signification, it is only for the 
purpose of establishing an identity of indication, which refers 
to the one and same thing, viz., the Individual Self and the 
Universal Self are one. 

223. One entranced in the meshes of Maya which is 
without a beginning, is apt to conceive of a difference between 
Jiva and Iswara ; and for preventing such an erroneous notion 
of subsisting difference, the signification of those words are 
cleared of all inconsistencies and made to indicate non- 

224. That can be done in the same way as in the instances 
already cited before: Of the space appropriated by a jar, 
having no difference whatever with the infinite space of which 
it is a mere unit, or as between the ether of water and that of 
cloud the difference is nil. 

225. As in the instance of the ether of water and cloud a 
difference in their associates [water and cloud respectively] 
constitutes the difference of the two, which is far from real ; 
and their receptacles, the ether present in a jar, and that 
infinite body which fills ail space are pure for they are un- 
associated : 

226. So the blissful sac (Iswara) and the cognitional (Jiva) 
are dependent on the associates of Illusion (Maya) and In- 



tellect (Boodhi) respectively ; and their occupation or seat, 
Brahma and.Uniform Intelligence are ever pure [and unrelated.] 

227. It" it be said, in order to arrive at a proper under 
standing, in regard to the indication of the words That and 
Thou no harm can result in the admission of the views of 
Sankhya and Yoga> for they help to establish the meaning 
clearly ; the reply is, we may as well take the help of the doc 
trines of a Charvaki for comprehending the indication of the 
foodful sac and that [the physical body] is fit to be consider 
ed [by the help of this borrowed interpretation] as self. 

228. Since between the doctrines of the Vedanta and 
those of Sankhya and Yoga there is marked difference, it is 
impossible to expect any agreement. This the author shews 
in the following manner : According to Sankhya and Yoga 
there is a difference in Self ; and the world is real, and Iswara 
is something distinct from the world and Jiva (Yoga). Unless 
they set aside these doctrines, there can be no agreement 
between them and a Vedantin. 

229. If the question be asked what necessity is there for 
ascertaining non-duality, since a knowledge of the unrelated 
condition of Jivatma is enough to procure release ? The 
reply is, in that case an individual may fix his belief on the 
reality of sensuous enjoyment as garland and sandal, and con 
sidering them to be ever-lasting, attain his release. 

230. That is to say, as it is impossible to regard a 
garland, sandal, etc., in the light of real and eternal subs 
tances, so it is impossible to separate the Jiva from his 
relationship with Iswara and the universe. 

231. Why? Because he is material in constitution ; and 
Matter (Prakriii, Ajnana or Maya) has always the pro 
perty of creating real, unreal ; moreover, Iswara is his 
controller; how then can he get rid of future re-incarnations 
when he is thus placed between Matter and Iswara, deluded 
by the first and controlled by the last ? 

232. But want of a right discrimination is alone the 


source of creating the above named conditions of relation and 
control ; when they are destroyed, by the advent of knowledge, 
or say, discrimination, the chance of creating the relationship 
and control is alike destroyed ; on this ground an antagonist 
may take his stand. In that case, he is one with a follower 
of Sankhya. [For indiscrimination is either want of discrimi 
nation, or something else ; or something opposed to it. Now 
these are the three forms ; of them the first is untenable, for, 
want implies an absence or nothing, and that cannot act as a 
productive cause of something, hence want or absence of 
discrimination cannot account for a cause of relation and and 
control. Neither the second form holds good; for we do not 
find that something else ; as for instance, a jar, to be such 
cause ; and the third form as it maintains something opposed 
to discrimination, clearly establishes ignorance which is the 
same with Prakriti of Sankhya. Thus then, it upholds 

233. If for the purpose of attributing bondage and 
release, Self be declared to be manifold, even that is not 
possible, for Maya is quite capable of doing that. 

234. How ? Like things created in a magical performance, 
(as the creation of a tree bearing mangoes or other fruits,) 
what is difficult of being produced is easily created by (Maya) 
Illusion and for its being naturally endowed with opposite or 
antagonistic properties \i. e., unreal], creates bondage and 
release or emancipation. Now it cannot be contended that 
as the first is an action of ignorance, consequently emancipa 
tion must be admitted as a necessity ; as that will be against 
Sruli, for nowhere does Sruti suffer the actualitity of 
emancipation, like that of bondage, to prevail. 

235. As for instance in reference to his actual condition 
Jiva is said to be truly " Without destruction, and origin, 
neither subject to bondage nor emancipation, without the 
means (hearing and the rest) and any desire of release, and 
in whom has ceased ignorance. 


236. But the milch cow Maya has two calves, Jiva ami 
Iswara, who, according to their inclination, drink the milk of 
duality, but that does not affect non-duality anyhow, nor can 
cause it any injury. 

237. Except a difference in name, there is no difference 
really present between the Uniform Intelligence and Brahma, 
just as there is none whatever between the space appropriated 
by a jar and the great body of it outside, infinite ether 

238. That Non-dual Principle or Entity [Secondless 
Brahma] which was present prior to the creation of the 
universe, (as is said in the Sruti) is even present now, and will 
so continue in the future i. e., during emancipation ; there is 
no doubt about that, but it is true. Then why are people 
generally so fond of creating a difference ? Ignorance or 
Illusion alone leads people astray and that is the reason why 
the generality of mankind are fond of creating a. difference 
between the Individual Self and Brahma. 

239. But the question is, if the unreality of the universe 
and reality of the secondless Entity or Principle, Brahma, 
which form the subject under consideration, be an established 
conviction with the wise, why are they found to behave like 
a man of the world [ignorant]? Where then is the necessity 
of acquiring knowledge of self. Therefore it is said, from 
the force of fructescent works, many wise persons are found 
to have, the same inclination for using material objects as they 
were accustomed to, prior to the rising of knowledge, but as 
they are free from illusion they are never ensnared in its 
meshes as ignorant persons are. 

240. To show that the wise are free from error, the oppo 
site condition of the ignorant is being first cited here. The 
ignorant have a firm belief in their mind as to the reality of 
enjoyment or suffering, both in the present sphere as well in 
the next [heaven, etc.,] and there is neither room for the 
secondless Brahma, nor is It discernible in their mind. 


241. The wise have an exactly opposite belief ; hence 
according to their individual perception and conviction,, 
people create either bondage or release. 

242. [Arguments for establishing the reality of Brahma 
and unreality of the universe are now being given.] The 
manifestibility of the secondless Brahma is derived from the 
Shastras and not from experience. It may be contended, as 
the secodless Brahma is not visible, hence it is impossible to 
ascertain It with any definite precision. But this assertion is 
untenable, inasmuch as Brahma in the form of intelligence is 
everywhere manifest and is clearly the subject of perception 
and experience in every individual. Then again, if it be said, 
this manifestibility of intelligence can be admitted, but as its 
entireness cannot be perceived, the universe also in its entirety 
is not perceived, therefore you are constrained to admit an 
equality between non-dual Brahma and the dual objective 
world, so far as an absence of complete perception goes ; and 
if in regard to the latter that does not stand in the way of 
your conception, why is Brahma to remain unmanifested 
then ? 

243. Thus then, the manifestibility or perception of both 
the phenomenal and noumenal in the same province being 
equal, if that does not prevent you from enquiring into the 
reality of the former, what objection can there be to hold a 
similar view with regard to the secondless Brahma ?* 

244. Now the Vedantin s opponent adopts a different line 
of argument to do away with non-duality. He says the 

* As in a pot of boiled rice, by feeling one rice, the whole of 
its contents are known to have been well cooked, so by the faculty 
of ascertainment residing inside the physical body, in intelligence, 
felicity, fulness, eternal freedom, unassociation, etc., which 
Brahma is endowed with, are easily perceived in every individual 
self after the destruction of ignorance has ceased to produce any 
more illusion. 


secondless is without a duality. Hence non-duality and its 
reverse, are naturally opposed to each other ; and from a 
perception of the phenomenal, no noumenal can be made out. 
Adopting a similar course, the Vedantin may as well exclaim, 
from their natural antagonism, when the secondless Brahma 
(noumenal) is manifested, the phenomenal must cease. Thus 
then both of us are equally placed so to speak ; but his 
opponent replies to this : The perception of intelligence is 
not opposed to the phenomenal, hence we are not in the same 
position. In other words from an absence of antagonism 
between your perception of the non-dual Brahma in intelli 
gence, and our duality, there is no similarity with the question 
raised by you and me. 

245. But inasmuch as the phenomenal is unreal though 
it is manifested, its reality (apparent) is not opposed to that 
of the secondless Brahma, and a Siddhanti says in reference 
to it : If you say so, then listen to me : the phenomenal is in 
a condition of non-being, impermanence or non-existence 
(asal] but full of illusion ; and that Brahma is the only Reality 
which no pralaya can affect, but continues to the end fully 

246. "To the end" is being illustrated : These unthink 
able worlds are full of illusion and created out of it, hence 
they are unreal. Having thus ascertained them, it is natural 
to consider Brahma as the only Reality. [ Unthinkable 
signifies what is not fit for thinking; these worlds for their 
being material are unreal, and for the matter of that indes 
cribable. Therefore having found out the unreality of the 
phenomenal, to regard the secondless Brahma as the only 
Reality is but natural.] 

247. If subsequently, the reality of phenomena reasserts 
again in your mind after having known them to be unreal, 
you are again to have recourse to arguments and analysis 
over and over, till that error ceases to exist, [and for such 


repetition there is the authority of Vyas as laid down in the 
Sariraka Sutras, Chap, iv.] 

248. But it may be enquired how long is that necessary 
to be practised ? Hence it is said, arguments for discriminat 
ing the secondless Reality, or the means hearing and the 
rest to that end, are not attended with pain and as they are 
beneficial, inasmuch as they destroy every thing else which is 
harmful to such knowledge of non-duality, they can be had 
recourse to ad libitum. In this respect, they differ from the 
supporting arguments of duality, for they are painful, as they 
cost an effort on the part of the individual seeking to establish 


249. Moreover, it may be argued that a person even with 
his knowledge of Brahma, is subject to hunger and thirst, in 
short, of the same worldly pursuits as he used to be before, 
in his state of ignorance ; now whether the declaration "I am 
hungry," "I am thirsty," indicates self ? Or the first personal 
pronoun has reference mainly to the Intelligence which is 
self? To such a question, a Vedantin admits the first view, 
so that the principle of egoism or individuality, you may well 
see, and no one asks you to do otherwise [not to see.] It may 
as well be mentioned here, that the second view is inapplicable, 
because self is unrelated and unassociated, and he can have 
no concern with hunger, thirst and the rest. 

250. But this discussion does not stop here : a dissenter 
is apt to maintain, though hunger and thirst may not properly 
be the subjects of self, yet through illusion or mistake one is 
apt so to perceive ; and says a Vedantin, in such a circum 
stance [of attributing hunger and thirst to self through illusion] 
the best plan is to destroy that illusion, and to practise dis 
crimination always. 

251. For, illusion comes from interminable desire which 
has no beginnning ; and for its removal, the repeated practice 
of discrimination [from things real and unreal] is very proper. 

252. That unreality of the phenomenal world, and its 


illusory nature can only be found out by argument, analvsis 
and deduction, and not by experience. But objection may be 
taken to it, for the experience of the exquisitely beautiful com 
position of the universe, which is quite unthinkable* and for 
its being a subject of cognition for the witness, it cannot be 
maintained that its unreality is alone capable of being deter 
mined by arguments and not experience. And that is now 
being removed as follows : It is not to be said, that the discri 
mination of unreality proceeds from argument only, where 
the witness has an experience of the unthinkable composition 
[of the phenomenal.] 

253. That unthinkable (composition) is an indication or 
sign of the falsity of an object ; but a dissenter seeks to con 
nect it with the pervasion of intelligence of self, and says, 
intelligence is endowed with it. To this, the reply is, from a 
want of prior contact or combination, the unthinkable com 
position, is one indication or sign of non-duality ; and the 
Vedantin admits the unthinkable source of self, because he 
must be either that or its reverse ; in the latter contingency, 
his origin must be capable of being conceived with ease, 
which is not a fact, because eternal ; hence there is no other 
alternative but to call him (Achinlyarachana) unthinkable, etc. 

254. How can intelligence said to be eternal ? Because 
nothing can be conceived anteceding it. If any one were to 
say, intelligence has a prior condition ; he is to be asked, 
What it is ? Whether it is conceived by intelligence or by 
insentiency ? Now then of the two prior conditions either of 
intelligence or insentiency, insentiency cannot be the instru. 
ment of discovering intelligence, and hence cannot precede it ; 

* Literal construction of achintyarachana is what has been 
given here, that would signify either the worthlessness of thinking 
about the source of the world, for being putside of self and a 
duality ; or what cannot be accurately surmised from thinking 
so vast and unknown. 


"With reference to the first view, the question is whether intelli 
gence is perceived by the same intelligence or by another 
intelligence to constitute a prior condition ; of them, if it be 
said in reply, that the prior condition of intelligence is quite 
distinct from the same intelligence, it will then amount to an 
admission of two intelligences, a duality and as non-duality 
does not recognise another intelligence, and even for argu 
ment s sake admitting its existence, there will yet be wanting a 
co-operation (pratiyogi) of that intelligence, without which its 
knowledge or perception will be clearly impossible. Then 
again, with that perception by another (prior) intelligence 
this one (intelligence) will be reduced to the condition of 
insentiency like that of a jar, etc. Thus then, there remains 
that other consideration which sets forth intelligence being 
manifested by the same intelligence. Even that is untenable, 
for want or absence of a thing cannot be perceived by itself. 
Moreover, in regard to phenomena, owing to a difference in 
the demonstrator the internal organ and the rest, and for 
an utter impossibility of perceiving an absence of that duality 
(the world) by itself, and for an absence of another iiis trtt- 
ment, a prior agent of that duality it may as well be said 
that like the want of prior condition of intelligence, the phe 
nomenal has also no prior condition, of another substance 
preceding it. Therefore it is said, the prior condition of 
duality is conceived by intelligence. 

255. The phenomenal with a prior condition [in intelli 
gence] is merely a product just as a jar is, yet its composition 
is unthinkable, and for the matter of that, false and unreal 
like phantasmagoria. 

256. Thus then, having shewn {ante 242-254] the mani- 
festibility of intelligence in the beginning, it is consequently 
eternal and visibly perceptible ; save and beyond it, every 
other thing is unreal, and that unreality is perceived through 
the same intelligence. But then objection may be taken as to 
the tangibility or visibility of the non-dual secondless Reality, 



Brahma. Hence the author proceeds to clear it away. In 
telligence is visible, and through it unreality of phenomena 
is conceived, consequently the assertion that the secondless 
entitylBrahma is not visible, would imply contradiction. 

257. If it be said, notwithstanding the explanation above 
given after the Vedanta, there are yet many Vedantins \vho 
have no faith in it, and why so ? The reply is not difficult to 
find : for in the case of Charvaks many of whom are well 
versed in logic and sound reasoning, yet are they found mis 
taking self with thejphysical body, and why is this? 

258. If you say from want of a clear intellect they are 
unable to discriminate properly, then I may as well conclude 
from a want of proper study or right interpretation of the 
Shaslras, those Vedantins shew no faith in the explanation 
about the visibility of the secondless Reality. 

259. When by a proper ascertainment of the secondless 
Reality, desires seated in the mind and passions are all des 
troyed, then an individual attains deliverance in life ; and in 
his present life he enjoys supreme felicity. This effect of self- 
knowledge is mentioned in the Sruti, and it is impossible to 
deny it, for it is a visible result. 

260. As for instance " When knowledge of self arrives 
maturity, the joints of the heart are all destroyed" Sruti. 
Joints refer to desires and passions. 

261. But here desires, refer to the mistaken identity o? 
egoism (Ahankara) and intelligence, as instanced in the use 
of the first personal pronoun I and its deflections, mine, etc. 

262. Though the above desires are sources of evil, yet 
in reference to egoism, if intelligence be kept apart and separ 
ate and not mixed up with it, and in that condition of Aliena 
tion of intelligence kept distinctly in view, millions and tens of 
millions of desires, will not be prejudicial to knowledge [of 
self] ; for the maturity of knowledge has already destroyed the 
joints af the heart [as has been mentioned already]. 

263. As for a preponderance of de-merits in you, the 


perception of the secondless Reality brings you no satisfaction 
and comfort, so even with the destruction of the desires and 
passions [joints of the heart], if as a result of fructescent 
works works which have already began to bear fruit desires 
do come afterwards.* 

264. They [desires originating with egoism or belonging 
to it] cannot in any way affect the Supreme Self who is intelli 
gence ; just as a disease of the physical body or the growth 
and decay or destruction of a tree cannot affect self, for he 
is quite unrelated, similarly after the destruction of illusory 
attribution of egoism to self, any desire originating in the first 
is quite incapable of distressing, causing pain or affecting him 
in any way. 

* With reflex intelligence, physical body, and self, egoism is 
apt to be mistaken by a gradual consecutive difference of which 
there are three varieties, viz., ordinary, active, and erroneous. 
The identity or oneness of egoism with the reflex intelligence is 
ordinary or natural, for it comes and goes with reflection of in 
telligence ; then again, identity of egoism with the physical body 
is called active [Karma] as it is a result of fructescent works, 
because the conception or experience " I am a man," etc., of all 
individuals lasts so long as fructescent works continue ; with their 
destruction there is no more any attachment or conceit for the 
physical body. And the mistaken identity of egoism with the 
witnessing intelligence which is quite unrelated is called erroneous, 
as it is conceived in ignorance, because with the destruction of 
ignorance a wise person destroys that identity, and he is never 
found to say " I am an agent," " I am a doer, an eater, happy or 
miserable." Sankaracharya has in this way, illustrated the mis 
taken identity of egoism. In regard to the first and the second, 
they are seldom found to be the subject of perception in the wise : 
from a destruction of ignorance and error or mistake, the wise 
are exempt from the third variety, so that the property of egoism 
in the shape of reflex intelligence and desires, cannot militate 
against the Witnessing Intelligence, so far as a theosophist is 


265. If you say, prior to the destruction of desires and ; 
passions of the heart, there is no possibility of any connection 
of desires with the unrelated blissfulness of the Supreme Self, 
hence there will be no more forgetfulness about it, for it 
means the same thing as destruction of the heart s joints, and 
that shall constitute your success. 

266. If you say ignorant persons know it not, hence it 
is the name for a heart s joint, for the difference between a 
wise and ignorant is known by the presence or absence of 
those joints (desires).* 

267. Between the ignorant and wise there is no difference- 
whatever, so far as an attachment or its reverse, for the physi 
cal body, organ, and intellect is concerned. 

268. As for example, between one who has the sacred 
thread, and one who has it not though belonging to the 
same caste, there is no difference so far as the rules of food 
are concerned, but their actual difference consists in the 
qualification of the former for the study of the Vedas to which 
the latter is dis-entitled. 

269. Destructions of passions and desires in the heart 
of the wise is proved by a reference to the Gita (Chap. XIV. 
v. 22) as follows : " They neither shew an aversion for 
miseries already befallen, nor evidence a desire for happiness, 
but like a person quite unaffected by them, allow things to 
take their usual course," and this is called destruction of the 
heart s malady. 

270. But the text quoted from the Gita may be construed 
as a piece of counsel for the wise ; it asks them to be quite 
unaffected either by pleasure or its reverse, and is therefore 

* The Sanskrit word Granth? means a joint, but the heart 
has no joint, it likewise means a knot, which even it has not, 
therefore it signifies crookedness, a malady, etc. ; as there can 
hardly be any grievous mistake about it, I have allowed it to- 
remain and this explanation is hardly called for. 


no proof of destruction of the heart s malady, passions and 
desires. If a dissenter would argue in this strain, the signifi 
cance of the word like in the verse would be rendered 
futile; and if it be alleged that from want of the requisite 
strength in the body, the wise are prevented from works, [so 
that virtually they cannot be said to have destroyed their 
desires, hence they abstain from actions,] then as a neces 
sary deduction, it would follow that the wise are ill and 

271. If you regard a knower of self, perfectly passive and 
indifferent to pleasure or pain, as a sick man, how very credit 
able is that to your intellect, and how clear is your knowledge. 
What next ? 

272. If you support your assertion by citing the Puram 
as a testimony, where it is said " Bharat and others were alike 
supremely indifferent, but they were sick ;" What prevents 
you from taking note of the Srutitext which mentions "Even 
in eating, playing, and sexual intercourse, a theosophist acts 
like one indifferent." 

273. Bharat and others did not live without eating, like 
wood and stone fixed in one place, but from fear of company 
they lived supremely indifferent to pleasure and pain. 

274. And that avoidance of company owed its origin to 
the following reason. People who mix much in company are 
often found addicted to harmful works, and those without it, 
enjoy felicity; hence for a person desirous of happiness 
avoidance of company is always essential. 

275. Dull and ignorant persons unacquainted with the 
drift of the Sacred Writings attribute de-merit to a theosophist, 
who has no inward longing for company, but to all appear 
ances externally, engaged in the practice of playing on a 
musical instrument, or accompanying it vocally ; let them do 
it, as it can bring forth no evil, for the unassociated condition 
of self is a natural inference to us [and a matter of fact]. 

276. Indifference, knowledge, and material abstinence 


are helpmates of each other; in many instances they are 
present together in the same person, and sometimes separately 
in different. 

277. But their cause, nature, and action (result) are 
different and are never of one and the same shape, hence, for 
a theosophist, it is proper to discriminate their difference. 

278. To pry into the defects of all subjects is the source* 

* If we take a little pain to enquire into the usual phases of 
an earthly existence we shall find everywhere we are subjected to 
pain varying in intensity and character. For instance, in intra- 
uterine life the fcetus is surrounded by and encompassed on all 
sides with the uterus, it floats in a quantity of fluid, and lives 
entirely on the mother s blood ; from her rough movements, it 
is indeed protected by the fluid, but yet it has to change position 
before delivery takes place, and that is attended with pain alike to 
the mother as to her offspring. Its nurture and growth are 
attended with the same anxiety and costs a deal of trouble. So 
on till old age, when the limbs refuse to carry the weight of the 
body, the spine is doubled up, sight and hearing are almost gone, 
teeth have left the jaws, allowing an incessant dribbling of the 
saliva, a source of nuisance both to the person and with whom 
he speaks, he loses control over his excrements, and they 
escape sometimes quite unnoticed for which his relatives are not 
charitable enough to overlook. He is reprimanded as an old 
useless dog, his dissolution is prayed for by the family when he is 
confined in a bed of sickness, and if it happens to be a chronic 
malady, many are the curses showered upon his head. He has 
grown old and useless, none cares for him, not even his children. 
Under such circumstances who is there that should not cultivate 
an aversion to life and its repeated re-incarnation ? Hence it is 
said, a man of indifference should always take things at their 
natural light or real worth and attribute faults glaringly, in relief 
as it were, to intensify his aversion for the world. 

Now the nature of indifference is to cast away every thing or 
shew any aversion for it. But as there are several degrees of 
indifference, it is classified under two varieties with several sub- 


or cause of indifference, and to have an aversion for all things 
is its nature, and not to desire what is already discarded is its 

279. Hearing, consideration/ and profound contempla 
tion are the source, discrimination of self the nature, and 
to prevent desires and passions from rising in the subjugated 
mind, the result of knowledge or perception.* 

divisions. For instance we have (i) Par, and (2) Apar Vyragya. 
The first is said to signify an aversion for wealth and prosperity 
already got, and altogether to discard or abandon it. The second 
is sub-divided into four varieties named respectively (a) struggling 
(Yataman}, (b) distinguishing (Vytireka), (c) earnestness (eka- 
indriya), and (d) subjugated. They are defined in the following 
wise : The Struggling is an indifferent variety and consists in 
regarding the defective nature of things. Distinguishing con 
sists in improving the good qualities of a person, deriving satis 
faction therefrom. Earnestness is to abstain the external organs 
of sense from internal desires ; and when they have been so far 
subdued that they no more trouble the mind, it is called 

Of this last we have three more sub-divisions to speak of, they 
are called dull, sharp, and very sharp. When with the demise 
of a wife, child, or loss of property one feels disgusted with the 
world, and desires to abandon it, that is called dull. Then again, 
when a person incessantly prays not to have a wife, wealth, or son 
in his present life, with a tranquil intellect, that is called sharp 
indifference ; and in regard] to a future state when he wishes not 
even for the blissful abode of Brahma, it is an instance of the 
last variety. 

* Yajnavalka addressing his wife Maitreyi says, " Self is sure 
worthy of being seen, he is fit to be heard [from the precepts of 
the wise] considered and meditated upon." Thus then in regard 
to the perception of self visibly by the mind the above are the 
several means, and as such they are sources of knowledge. More 
over, discrimination of self, has reference to the ascertainment of 
the existing difference between the uniform intelligence and 


280. Forbearance and the rest* are the cause earnest 
attention, the nature and the slackening of the usual prac 
tices of people, the result of mental abstinence. 

281. Of them Indifference/ knowledge, and actual 
abstinence, knowledge is the principal for its bringing in 
emancipation, while indifference and abstinence are merely 
the means of knowledge and helpful to it. 

282. For all three to continue in equal force, in the same 
individual, can only happen to a person as a result of his 
superior devotion ; but from some obstacles or other, it often 
happens for one or two of them to get reduced. 

egoism, but this need not necessarily excite any misgiving as 
telling prejudicially against the doctrine of non-duality. For the 
uniform intelligence is something other than the physical body ; 
organs sensory and active, vital airs, etc., etc., and to look upon 
it as Self or Brahma is the height of knowledge and the acme of 
discrimination ; but then to connect desire with egoism as my 
house, 1 my son/ my money, mine eyes/ are conceived in error, 
hence the ascertainment of difference is insisted upon ; but for 
one, who has no mistake of self as an agent or instrument, his 
egoism has already merged into the Absolute, the Infinite, 
Supreme Self, and his discrimination is matured. Similarly the 
concluding portion has reference to keep the mind free from being 
disturbed with other illusions in regard to self after it has been 
thoroughly subjugated and restrained from the disturbing influence 
of the senses. 

* They include : 

(1) Forbearance (yatna) 

(2) Canons to be observed (niyama), 

(3) Posture (asana) t 

(4) Regulating the vital air (pranayama), 

(5) Restraining the organs of sense (pratyahara), 

(6) Fixed attention (dharana), 
(?) Contemplation (dhyana), 

(8) Conscious meditation (savikalpa samadhi). 


283. One whose knowledge is diminished by an increase 
of indifference and mental abstinence never attains 
emancipation at once, but is entitled to enjoy the felicity of 
the liberated in life, as a result of his pious devotions. 

284. On the other hand, one who has a preponderance 
of knowledge with less of indifference and abstinence is 
sure to enjoy the supreme felicity of Nirvan, and not that 
destruction of visible misery which forms the happiness of the 
liberated in life. 

285. It is the nature of indifference to regard everything 
as worthless, hence even the several abodes from Bhur to 
Brahma are looked upon as no better than straw, that is its 
highest limit ; but knowledge has its finality in producing a 
steady or firm foothold of affection for all creatures, equally 
with one s own self. 

286. As in the state of profound (dreamless) slumber all 
external objects are forgotten, so is forgetfulness of enjoyment 
[of sensuous objects] in the state of wakefulness said to be 
the final point of abstinence (Upariti)* In this mannner, 
the shades of difference present in indifference and the two 
others, are fit to be ascertained, [so that one may know which 
is superior or the best, and which less so and may follow 

287. Though for a presence or continuance of fructescent 
works of various kinds, even a theosophist is at times infested 
with desires, yet that need not stand as a plea for construing 
the Shastras in a contrary light. 

288. From a force of fructescent works, whatever condi 
tion a theosophist may be circumstanced to fill, it can create 

* Abstinence is continually to keep the external senses aloof 
from sensuous objects, after they have been turned away from 
them, thereby to keep the mind engaged in hearing the precepts 
on the Brahma ; otherwise to abandon all acts enjoined in the 
Shastras, in the prescribed order [by turning a Sannayasf]. 


no difference, his knowledge suffers not the least, consequently 
his emancipation is certain.* 

289. To sum up then : As in a piece of painting 
several figures are duly represented, so is this exquisite 
objective world, a duality through the force of illusion 
attributed to the intelligence of the Supreme Self; and it is 
essentially requisite for that illusion to be shaken off and 
intelligence alone particularized (as the secondless, non- 
dual Reality.) 

290. The fruit of reading the present treatise is enjoined 
in the following words : Those of clear intellect who 
incessantly study it to find outfits profound signification, 
shall cease to be enchanted with the sight of this unreal 
world like the ignorant, or as they used to be, in a prior stage 
(\vhen,wanting t in knowledge), j 


* For with the destruction of ignorance the material of which 
the future body is to be built is destroyed and he is freed. 

Calcutta, is/ January > 1990, 


the Commentary of Nrishingha Saraswati, in Sanskrit. Price 
Re. i. Postage i anna. 

on MATTER & SPIRIT. Price Rs 3. Reduced to Re. 1-8. (Slight 
ly damaged.) Postage i anna. (Only a few copies available.) 

Do. HINDI TRANSALATION. Price As. 12. Postage i anna. 

Do. With BENGALI TRANSALATION. Price As. 12. Postage 
i anna. 

# % THIS work establishes the Non-Duality of the Soul and 
the Brahma, and is the Master-Key for attaining Nirvana by 
the destruction of Ajnana (A-knowledge). 

The Arya of Lahore thus speaks of the work : 
The work before us is a tri-lingual translation, together 
with the Original Sanskrit of the work of the above name. 
* * * * The merits of these several translations 

are undoubtedly great. The Bengali rendering is that of Pundit 
Kalibur Vedantabagish, the Hindi has been done by the well- 
known Sanskrit Scholar, Lady Rama Bai, while the English is 
the work of the Editor [N. D.] himself. The book contains also 
a Preface and an introductory Essay on Matter and Spirit. The 
work is a proof of the indefatiguable zeal and industry of Babu 
Heeralal Dhole, whose English rendering alone is such as is sure 
to command a very wide circulation for the book." 

The Philosophic Inquirer of Madras remarks thus : 
11 It is a bi-lingual [tri-lingual] translation of the Vedantasara 
or the Essence of the Vedanta Philosophy of Paramhansa Sa- 
dananda Jogindra. The English rendering of it is from the 
erudite and scholarly pen of our friend Dr. Nandalal Dhole, 
late Surgeon to the Courts of Khetree and Marwar. 
We may make bold to assert that the translation appears to us 
to be one which throws much credit on the translator, because of 
its simplicity and perspicacity of style. In cases where the 
Text is obscured by the technicalities peculiar to the subject, the 


translator has given ample annotations at foot of each page 
explaining the terms and contexts, so as to enable the student of 
Vedantism to understand the subject without any external aid, 
and also in view to make the translation itself lucid and un 
mistakable. The translator appears to us to have acquitted 
himself well, and from the way in which he has done his work, 
there can be no doubt that he has mastered the subject he has 
undertaken to handle, in a way profitable to others also." 
Indian Nation in speaking of the work says : 

" It gives the Sanskrit Text, and Translations in Hindi, 
Bengali and English. The Sanskrit Text is largely annotated. 
There is also a very learned, philosophical dissertation on the 
doctrines of the Vedantasara and corresponding European 
systems. The book is well got up ; and a better edition would 
hardly be desired." 

The Theosophist in reviewing the work remarks : 

" The views, at any rate in its first English part, being 
avowedly those expressed in the columns of our magazine, very 
little has to be said of this portion, except that the author has 
made uncommon good use of it, and elaborated very cleverly the 
whole. One point, however, may be noticed, as it is found to be 
constantly contradicted and picked holes into, by the theists as well 
as by all the supporters of independent creation viz., the definition 
of Matter. 

11 Kapila defines Matter to be eternal and co-existent with 
Spirit. It was never in a state of non-being, but always in a 
state of constant change, it is subtle and sentient, etc., etc., (p. 2). 
"This is what the Editor of this Journal has all along main 
tained and can hardly repeat too often. The article : What is 
Matter and What is Force ? in the Theosophist for September 
1882, is sufficiently lucid in reference, to this question. It is at 
the same time pleasant to find that our learned friend and 
brother, Mr. T. Subba Rao Garu, the great Adwaitee scholar 
shares entirely with all of us these views, which every intutional 
scholar who comprehends the true spirit of the Sankhya Philo 
sophy, will ever maintain. This may be proved by the perusal 
of a recent work on Yoga Philosophy by the learned Sans- 
kritist, Dr. Rajendra Lala Mitra, the Introduction to which has 
just appeared, showing clearly how every genuine scholar com 
prehends the Sankhya in the same spirit as we do. The ONE- 
LIFE of the Buddhists, or the PARABRAHMA of the Vedatins, 
is omnipresent and eternal. Spirit and Matter are but its mani 
festations. As the energising force Purtish of Kapila it is 
Spirit as undifferentiated cosmic matter it is Mulaprakriti. As 
differentiated cosmic matter, the basis of phenomenal evolution, 
it is Prakriti. In its aspect of being the field of cosmic ideation 
it is Chidakasam ; as the germ of cosmic ideation it is Chinmatra ; 
while in its characteristic of perception it is Prajna. Who 
ever presumes to deny these points denies the main basis of Hindu 


Philosophy and clings but to its exoteric, weather-beaten, fast- 
fading out-shell. The main point of the work under review 
seems to be to indicate how in this basic doctrine, upon which 
the whole structure of philosophy rests, both in the Aryan and 
Arhat tenets meet and are identical, in all, except in forms of 
expression, and how again Kapila s Sankhya supports it. The 
author has in this respect admirably succeeded in condensing 
the whole spirit of the philosophy in a few short pages. And a 
close study of the same is sufficient to bring the intelligent reader 
to the same sense of perception. For a superficial reader, Dr. 
N. Dhole, the English translator, seems to hold that Spirit is 
something quite apart and distinct from Matter, and quite a 
different substance or no-substance, if you please. But such 
readers can only be referred to the following extract : 

< And since the recognition of this First Principle, 

call it Prakriti, Purusha, Parabrahma, or Matter, Spirit, the 
Absolute, or the Unknowable, clashes not with the cherished 
ideas of the most inveterate Freethinker 

"The above passages clearly prove that like all true Adivaitees 
the learned Doctor holds Spirit and Matter to be but different 
phases and aspects of the ONE-LiEE which is every thing or 
no nothing; if you prefer. It would be a pertinent question 
to ask, how it is then that the author expresses himself a Dualist ! 
The simple explanation will be found in the consideration that so 
far as the phenomenal, or the manifested world is concerned, the 
idea of Duality is launched into the discussion to indicate the 
two aspects of the one eternal whole, which together set the 
machinery of evolution into working order. But once turn from 
the manifested into the nonmenal, the unmanifested Life and the 
erudite author will most probably cease to call himself a dualist, as 
is made very clear from the above quoted extract from his work. 


" It is needless to say again that every student of Adwaitism 
ought to possess himself of a copy of the work under review." 

The Purusharthapahtaini of Masulipatam reviews the work 
as follows : 

11 We have to acknowledge with thanks the Vedantasara. 
It is a Manual of Advaita Philosophy of Paramahansa Sadananda 
Jogindra with an Introductory Memoir on Matter and Spirit. It 
is very ably prefaced by the Editor, Mr. Heeralal Dhole, whose 
learned and patriotic spirit longs to see the revival of the once 
glorious spiritual or religious advancement of our Aryan nation. 
The Memoir and the English Translation of the Original Sans 
krit Text by Dr. Nandalal Dhole, late Surgeon to the Courts of 
Khetree and Marwar, with copious annotations, do justice to his 
ripe erudition. Kapila Maha Muni, the first Prince of Yoga 
Philosophy, has his masterly views expounded in the Memoir. 
The book is a Treasure of the Aryan Spiritual Philosophy and 
is to be in the possession of every enlightened gentleman," 


Vols. Demy 8Vo. 

,% WHATEVER, the Aryan Philosophy says concerning the 
A/ma (Soul) and Parabrahma (Asolute) has been fully and 
elaborately discussed in the present work with critical notices 
of the other contending systems. It embraces dissertations 
on Cosmogony, Psychology, Evolution, Yoga and Emancipa 
tion. It is a complete clue for the comprehension of the 
SCIENCE OF MAN, his relation to the Universe, and his ultimate 
destiny. It clears out the mistaken notions concerning Iswara 
and Parabrahma, and reviews Theism and Pantheism in all 
its aspects. In short, as a Key to ESOTERIC SCIENCE it is 

Ditto Sanskrit Edition Rs. 2-8. 

English Edition. Price Rs. 5. Postage As. 2. 

The Indian Selector in acknowledging the work writes : 
" We acknowledge with thanks the * second 

Volume of the Vedanta Series, the Panchadasi. It is * 

* translated with copious annotations 

by Mr. Nandalal Dhole, L.M.S., the same gentleman who tran 
slated the Vedantasara. The Publisher deserves credit for 
giving to the public the facility by supplying them with the 
ancient Hindu literature in cheap form. The [Book] is handy 
and neatly printed." 

The Arya says : 

" Mr. Nandalal Dhole, L.M.S., translator of the Vedantasara 
and the Publisher of his works, Mr. Heeralal Dhole, are doubt 
less engaged in the laudable work of supplying the world with 
English Translations of the Aryan Philosophic and Spiritual 
literature. A Hand-Book of Hindu Pantheism, the Panchadasi 
with copious annotations * * * 

* * was received in our office during the last 

month. In it we find many valuable things deserving of a care 
ful study by the votaries of Occult science, and * 

we recommend the work to the 
public for patronage." 

The Theosophist writes as follows: 

"The work purposes to discuss fully and elaborately what 
ever the Aryan Philosophy says concerning the Atma (Soul) and 
Parabrahma (Absolute), with critical notices of the other con 
tending systems. If we may judge from the contents of the 
[work] under notice, the authors evidently are for the Adwaita 
doctrine of Srimat Sankaracharya. The arguments against the 
opponents of that system are undoubtedly strong. 

"The publication of the book under review is likely to do good, 
and we would recommend it to all who may be interested in a 
study of the Aryan Philosophy" 


The Philosophic Inquirer remarks : 

"If there is a country in which the highest truths of philosophy 
were taught to the earliest man, it was our own country India, 
the cradle of philosophy, which many a great intellect of our 
land delighted in, it was the Pantheistic phase of our Vedantic 
philosophy ; if there is a philosophy, which while being most 
highly intellectual and sentimental, can at best satisfy the human 
instincts, it is, we venture to say, without fear of contradiction, 
Pantheism proper sprung in India. Any interpretation of such a 
philosophy faithful in its entirety must be welcome to all thinking 
minds; the undertaking therefore of our eminent contributor 
N. D. to translate the Panchadasi with annotations is laudable 
in every respect indeed ; and on perusal of the 
above translation to hand, we have been able to find therein 
a clear and systematic exposition of Vedantism to the extent 
executed. We cordially invite the attention of all our friends 
and readers to this very useful publication of the translator of 
the Vedantasara, and hope that it will meet with a large support 
from the educated section of our countrymen, the kind of support 
which it deserves." 

III. On the Road to Self-Knowledge. Containing 
PARAMARTHASARA AND HASTAMALAK, with English translations. 

Price Re. 1-8. 

*% THIS work is admirably suited for beginners. Srimat 
Sankaracharya and others have fully and elaborately expound 
ed the doctrine of non-duality in this book. 

IV- Fundamental Truths on the Problem of 
Existence. BY "N. D." 

The Philosophic Inquirer reviewing the work writes : 
"The author has taken great care and evinced much subtility of 
discrimination, to present before us a concise dissertation on the 
philosophic system of Kapila, the father of Materialistic philo 
sophy, as the author calls him. He then attempts to point out 
the difference between the Materialistic philosophy of Kapila and 
its modern aspect. 

"What his views are in respect to this great problem, the attempt 
to slove which has been only fruitful in splitting the holders of 
different and conflicting theories into bitter and uncompromising 
sectarians and bigots of dogmatic proclivities, may best be gather 
ed from the following most telling passage : 

"And now that Pantheism is attracting increased attention 
from the highest intellects of the West, after sleeping a sleep of 
death in this cradle land of humanity where it first saw the light 
of day ; and since the recognition of this First Principle, call it 
Prakriti, Purusha, Parabrahma, or Matter, Spirit, the Absolute, 
or the Uuknowable, clashes not with the cherished ideas of the 
most inveterate Freethinker, the hard materialist, the staunch 
Atheist, the inexorable Physicist, or the follower of the so-called 


isms who stand on the legs of logic and reason ; it may justly be 
termed as the centre round which the satellites of Religion re 
volve. Our adepts have been proclaiming from their high pe 
destal this solemn truth for centuries ; it has been repeated quite 
recently that the Deist s God exists nowhere. Yet, even yet, the 
world is slow to profit by such instruction, and so it must continue 
to the end of the chapter. 

"After stating in brief the aim of the work a work 

which will, as he [the author] himself thinks tend to stimulate a 
study of those precious records of thoughts which our progenitors 
left a legacy for us to inherit, far richer than the priceless Kohi- 
noor or the collective totality of the world s gold and which now 
are monopolized by the cobwebs of the spider ; and if it be so for- 
tuuate as to secure one ardent and earnest enquirer patiently 
taking up the work and finding the lost key, our end and aim will 
be gained ." 

V. Yoga Shastra Shiva Sanhita in Sanskrit with a 
Preliminary Discourse on Yoga Philosophy by Madavacharya 
(Vidyaranya Swami), the reputed author of Sarva Darshan 
Sangraha, Panchadasi, etc. Cloth Bound Re. 1-8. 

The National Guardian introducing this book to its readers 
writes : 

"Tantras are works on Mysticism for the development of psy 
chic powers latent in man, and Yoga is its stepping-stone. The 
word Yoga in Sanskrit means to unite, and the process of 
uniting is called Yoivgic krtya. When a unit is added to 
another unit, it is Yoga, and as in the Science of Numbers, so in 
the Realm of Mind, as the Duke of Argyll terms it, when the 
Jivatma (Soul) is united with the Paramatma (Absolute), it is 
Yoga in its occult significance. When one unit is added to 
another unit the separate existence of the single unit is a nonenti 
ty, and the two is combined in one, similarly when by Yowgic 
kriya man unites his Self with the Divine Essence, he becomes 
One with the Brahma (Absolute). Realizing this truth, Jesus 
Christ, nineteen centuries ago, uttered to the gazing rustic ranged 
round him, I and my Father are ONE. Sakhya Muni too, the 
founder of Buddhism, long before Jesus hailed the Holy Light 
preached the doctrine of One-Life. Srimat Sankaracharya, the 
famous Adwaita preacher, followed suit. But it was Patanjali, 
who first expounded this Science, and systematized it in form. But 
to modern Indians all this is phantasmagoria. For having lost 
the right-key to comprehend the esoteric teaching of the Shastras, 
the educated mind is now in the horns of a dilemma to accept or 
reject the transcendental doctrines of his sires. The appearance 
at this juncture of a Transcendental Work from a scientific point 
of view is, therefore, of supreme importance, and we hail with 
delight the publication of THE ESOTERIC SCIENCE AND PHILO 
SOPHY OF THE TANTRAS [Yoga Shastras]. 









Translator, " Vedantasara," &c. 







[/I// rights reserved.] 


11 Elysium Press," Kasi Ghose s Lane, Beadon Stresf, 



On the Discovery of Felicity. 

IN beginning this treatise, the author BHARATITIRIHA GURU, 
opens with a recital of the main subject of the Brihadaranyaka 
Upantshad:" A person who knows self, his individual self 
to be one with Brahma, has no more desire left in him, for 
whose enjoyment he is to hunt after." 

2. The purport of the above Sruti text will be fully 
declared in the present chapter, and by that means the ac 
quisition of felicity by one liberated in life will be thoroughly 
set forth. 

3. With the view of explaining the signification of the word 
person in the aforesaid passage, the mode of creation is now 
being determined. It is said "Maya* through the reflection 
of intelligence creates (Jiva) individual and Iswara" (Sruti). 

* Here the word Maya refers to the reflected shadow of 
Brahma, which is intelligence and bliss. The material cause of 
phenomena with its three attributes satwa, raja and tama is called 
Prakriti ; from a difference in composition viz., a preponderance 
of the pure good, and impure good Prakriti is respectively trans 
formed into Maya and Avidya. Now the reflected shadow of 
intelligence of (Brahma) in Maya is Iswara, while the same 
reflection in Avidya is called Jiva. Thus then we find reflected 


Hence it is natural to infer that by Jiva and Iswara the whole 
universe has been contrived or fabricated. 

4. The question naturally arises how much of the world 
is created by Jiva and Iswara respectively ? From determi 
nation to entrance belongs to Iswara ; and from waking to 
emancipation, Jiva. That is to say, "Iswara for the desire 
that he should multiply and manifest himself in diverse forms" 
(Sniti) constitutes the beginning of the creative process in 
dicated by the word determination ; and, his entrance in the 
form of the Spirit or self (Atma) in all beings indicated by 
the word entrance is the finality of that process. In regard 
to Jiva s creation the explanation is, one whose origin is the 
condition of wakefulness, that is to say the world, and eman 
cipation, the final destination, for his conceit in them, they are 
said to be his contrivance. Now Jiva for the conceit about 
his body, etc., and constant occupation in works, and enjoy, 
ment of happiness, with wife, food and drink while awake, 
enjoys felicity in profound slumber; and in dreaming 
slumber, he is an agent for experiencing felicity or its reverse, 
and when he realizes self to be the discoverer of all the three 
above named conditions, and no other than Brahma, he is 
emancipated and has no more re-births in store for him. 

5. The signification of the word person is now being 
set forth. [He is] " that changeless, unrelated intelligence, 

shadow of Brahma with the three attributes good, active and bad 
forms Prakriti, which for a preponderance of pure good or 
impure good is differentiated into illusion and ignorance or 
nescience. Iswara is the reflection of intelligence in Maya, which 
is entirely subservient to him, and he is called all-knowing ; while 
Jiva is subject of ignorance (Avidya) it forms his cause-body, 
and for his conceit in it he is called Jiva; Prajna, etc. ; and as 
this ignorance is varied, so are beings of diverse kinds ; this is 
the reason why Jiva and Iswara are said to be made by reflection. 
Maya ?,nd Avidya are formed from Prakriti. 


the supreme self, subject of error and illusion which 
attribute the physical body, sensory and active organs, etc., to 
him (in short through mistake these are confounded with 
self). He is unrelated naturally, yet from mutual illusory 
attribution is said to be present in (Boodhi) spiritual soul, 
though that has no connection with him ; and this (the 
attribute of the word Jiva ), is here meant by the word 
" person." 

6. Jiva who is only a reflection of intelligence is qualified 
for emancipation with the uniform intelligence and not alone, 
because that uniform intelligence is the abiding place or seat 
[of reflex], and without the actuality of such site no one can 
be the seer of an illusion [as for instance in the case of a 
snake in rope, the rope is the abiding place or site of the 
snake but without it that illusion cannot possibly occur]. 

7. "That reflex with its abiding seat, the uniform intelli 
gence is subject to bondage, etc." This is now being pointed 
out in the two following paragraphs. When combined with 
the abiding uniform intelligence, the reflex intelligence of 
the Jiva takes shelter of the particle of error, (the reflected 
shadow of intelligence is called a particle of error, for all 
reflections are false,) and acknowledges self to be the body, 
etc., and says " I am worldly." 

8. And when freeing himself from error, conceives self 
to be no other than the uniform intelligence then he says " I 
am the unrelated intelligence," and is gratified with that 

9. If it be said, to attribute individuality, i.e., connect 
the first personal pronoun I with that unrelated intelligence 
[Supreme Self] is not possible, so as to make one exclaim "I 
am the unrelated intelligence," and it cannot be perceived 
so. The reply is, egoism or individuality has three different 
significations of which one is primary and two secondary. 

10. Mistaken attribution of an identity of the uniform 
and reflex intelligences on one another is said to b.e the primary 


indication of the word (aham} " I am ;" for ordinarily people 
use it in that sense. 

11. Now then for the two subordinate or secondary signi 
fications. The reflex and uniform intelligences are both of 
them separately looked upon as aham. Both in common 
parlance and Vedic illustration, all wise persons have ever 
betfc in the habit of using it in that sense.* 

12. In the ordinary phrase " I do go" a wise person dis 
connects the uniform from the reflex intelligence, and acknow 
ledges the former to be the literal signification of the personal 
pronoun I/ 

13. In the Vedic expression used by way of illustration 
as for instance " I am the unrelated intelligence," I refer 
to the uniform intelligence according to the light of the 

14. If it be alleged, knowledge and its reverse are only 
the attributes of the reflex intelligence, and never that of the 

* The primary import of I am is the predicated intelligence 
of the internal organ with reflection of intelligence, and it does not 
indicate intelligence pure et simple, hence its subject neither ; but 
then by the indication of abandoning a part from the reflex of the 
internal organ and intelligence according to the usual practice 
amongst men and in the Vedas, the remaining unabandoned part 
implies (Aham) I am or the principle of individuality, and this is 
its indicative indication, but that is also its secondary or subor 
dinate import. From the function of that indicative indication, 
the pure intelligence is a subject of egoism ( I am ), and as the 
subject of function is dependent or subject of this world, neces 
sarily therefore from indication, intelligence is also called subject 
of function. Now the subject of function signifies the disappear 
ance of envelopment from intelligence which then produces an 
aversion for the world ; and that indifference when strengthened 
leads a person to discard it altogether as an unreality but existing 
apparently from illusion, and seek the company of a Guru for 
acquiring knowledge of Self. 


uniform, hence how it is possible, for the reflex intelligence 
of the individual to perceive and acknowledge " I am the 
uniform intelligence ?" 

15. The reply is : such a declaration is not at all faulty ;. 
for both the intelligences are identical in nature, and reflex 
is merely a false name ; with its removal or disappearance 
the uniform alone remains. 

16. If you say the perception " I am the eternal uniform 
intelligence" to be false too, I do not deny it. Just as the 
illusion of snake in a rope is false, and that snake has no 
more the power of moving or holding its head up, so the 
connection of egoism with either the reflex or uniform intelli 
gence can alike be admitted to be unreal. 

17. Though the perception " I am the eternal uniform 
intelligence" be false, and from that it is quite natural to 
expect the destruction of the world, for it is well-known that 
the offering given to a Deva is according to his dignity : there 
fore according to the nature of the ignorance which deter 
mines the reality of phenomena, is its destruction possible by 
the light of knowledge proportionately. 

18. In the aforesaid manner, by regarding the reflex in 
telligence (Jiva) to be identical with the uniform intelligence, 
there follows the perception " I am the uniform intelligence," 
for without this knowledge of their oneness, cognition of 
non-duality can never accrue, as is over and over said in the 


19. As in the instance of the body considered to be self, 
men generally fix their belief without any reserve or doubt, 
so in the case of the finite intelligence of the Jiva regard 
ed one with the uniform and all-knowing intelligence [of 
Brahma] one should alike consider it without doubt and 

* When a person says "I am a Brahmana" he has no more 
doubts nor any conflicting ideas about his being one belonging to 


X). Sankaracharya in his Upadesha Sahasri expresses also 
the same opinion that such a perception is a means to eman 
cipation : "Like the knowledge of the physical body being 
self, one who gets that refuting knowledge which hinders the 
conception or perception of the body being self, is released 
though he may desire it not." 

21. If any one were to say that the word this has re 
ference to the visibility of self [as for instance " This jar," 
"This book," "This cloth." Here this is used to identify 
the several articles in connection with which it is used ; so in 
the phrase "This am I" the visibility of self indicated by 
the first personal pronoun is established by this ] and that 
visibility is full well-apprehended by us [Vedantins], for he 
is self-manifested intelligence, and as such, always visible.* 

22. And as in the case of the visible "tenth person," 
ignorance can be attributed, so with regard to intelligence 
(self) visibility and invisibility, knowledge and imperception 
are alike attributable in spite of his visibility. 

23. The ignorance of the tenth person, is now being 
declared. Ten persons collected in a certain spot to cross 
a river ; on alighting at the opposite bank they count them- 

the Brahman caste, and the connecting of T with that caste con 
nects Self with it ; in the same way, similar knowledge in respect 
to each individual self is fit to be used as a means for attaining 
emancipation, for as in the next verse, by transplanting self from 
the physical body, caste, etc., on account of contradiction they 
imply when he comes to exclaim "I am Brahma his emancipa 
tion is an accomplished fact, for the ignorance and the materials 
for future re-birth are all destroyed by knowledge. And for such 
a purpose the Sruti has used the word this (ay am.) 

* Intelligence stands in no need of discovery by any extra 
neous means, hence always manifested. Then again, the instru 
ment of envelopment is also wanting for which it is always visible. 
If intelligence were to have envelopment [ignorance has it only] 
it will be reduced to the condition of inbentiency. 


selves, but strange to say, whoever counts, forgets always 
to include himself, and comes to stop at number nine, though 
the tenth (himself) is visibly present to all. Thus bewildered, 

24. They exclaim that their tenth is missing, and 
virtually he must have perished by drowning. This force of 
ignorance is called its envelopment (avarana). 

25. Fully believing that their "tenth person" has perished 
in the river, and is now no more, they bewail his loss, and 
vent to tears. This is due to the creating or superimposition 
( Vikshep) of ignorance. 

26. At this juncture, a stranger came up he had not 
been similarly affected by ignorance and said, your tenth 
person has not perished ; on hearing his word they got in 
visible knowledge of the tenth, resembling men s knowledge 
of Swarga and the several abodes. 

27. Then when he shewed them their tenth by counting 
over, and pointed out the mistake and how it did occur, they 
left off crying and were very glad to find their missing number. 

28. As in the previous illustration, we have the several 
conditions of ignorance, to wit : envelopment, creation, in 
visible knowledge, visible knowledge, joy and dissipation of 
grief, so how self, is to be considered by attaching these seven 
conditions consecutively to him is shewn in the following 

29. Engrossed in their usual avocations and worldly 
concerns, when men are unable to know the real nature of 
self, it is called ignorance ; 

30. And the absence or want of manifestibility of self 
in that condition is called envelopment; as to regard him as 
an agent and instrument is akin to the creating power of the 
same ignorance. And they exclaim "There is no uniform 
intelligence." " It is not manifested," etc, [The attribution of 
the reflected shadow of intelligence tcgether with the subtle 
and gross bodies to self, i.e., to mistake them with him has 
for its cau - the same ( Vikshep) projecting force of ignorance.] 


31. When there follows an invisible knowledge of the 
uniform intelligence as for instance, " It exists," from the 
self-evident postulates of the Shasiras, and subsequently by 
due consideration, profound thinking and discrimination, an 
individual perceives that he is no other than the same uniform 
intelligence, it is called visible knowledge. 

32. Then again, when by casting aside the ideas of agent 
and instrument with regard to that intelligence, a person is 
freed from experiencing delight or pain, and finally as a suc 
cessful result of that knowledge experiences blissfulness, that 
is called dissipation of pain and satiety. 

33. These conditions of ignorance, concealment/ crea 
tion, invisible and visible knowledge, dissipation of grief/ 
and delight in the form of satiety are conditions of the indivi 
dual only, and not of the uniform intelligence. 

34. They are the ordinary cause of bondage and eman 
cipation. Of them, ignorance with its powers of envelopment 
and creation, super-imposition, or projection are the cause of 
bondage; while the rest are the source of emancipation. 

35. With the view of determining the nature of ignorance 
and its two powers, ignorance is now being declared. Wise 
persons* in their prior conditions had always comported 
themselves like persons quite indifferent; for instance they 
would say " we know nothing," which is another name for 

36. The nature of envelopment and its actions is thus set 
forth : To throw aside the method of the Shasiras and de 
pending entirely upon arguments to say " There is no uniform 
intelligence and it is never manifested" in short to act in 
opposition to what conduces to its knowledge or perception is 
a result of envelopment/ 

Vikshep* signifies projection, superimpesition, creation, or 
want of apprehension. 


37 Creation or projection (Vikshep ) is thus illustrated. 
To attribute the physical and subtle bodies, with the re 
flex intelligence (Jiva), to the abiding uniform intelligence 
is a result of this force of ignorance. It is the source of 
bondage ; and belief concerning self as an agenfor instru 
ment (a doer of action) is its result. 

38. But as prior to its arising, the force of creation or 
projection was absent, it may be said to speak of ignorance 
and envelopment as conditions of that projection is improper ; 
it is therefore cleared : Though it may be wanting in that 
prior state yet as its impress (sanskara) is present, therefore to 
look upon ignorance and its envelopment as conditions of 
Vikshep [reflex intelligence] imply no contradiction. 

39. Ignorance and envelopment for their priority of con 
tinuance to Vikshep cannot be regarded as a condition of 
self [because he is unrelated and is therefore subject to no 
condition (unconditioned), hence ultimately it comes to this, 
that ignorance and envelopment are simply conditions of the 
reflex intelligence. 

40. If it be said, instead of admitting the impress of 
projection (which is uncertain and not well-known) for regard 
ing ignorance and envelopment as its condition, they can be 
attributed to the Supreme Brahma, and looked in the light 
of Its condition ; the reply is, such an admission is clearly 
untenable for all objects are merely raised on the Para- 
brahma hence their source and they are conditions of 
the Jiva. 

41. If it be said, the conditions which follow subsequenj 
to the origin of projection as for instance, " I am a doer," 
" I am a theosophist," " I am free from grief," " I am con 
tent," are found to belong to the individual and are not 
dependent on Brahma. 

42. To that I do not disagree; for " I am ignorant, and 
the presence, being and manifestibility of the Supreme Brahma 
are not conceivable to me." In this way, the two prior 



conditions of ignorance and envelopment are clearly rendered 
apparent to belong to the individual ; hence they are his 

43. Ignorance is not a condition of the Supreme Brahma 
and what previous professors have said regarding It, as the 
source or refuge of ignorance, has been only for the purpose 
of describing the abiding seat of Brahma. And for the 
conceit of all men in ignorance, it has been admitted as the 
condition of the Individual ; this is particularly declared here. 

44. Thus then having done with a description of the 
three conditions, ignorance, envelopment and projection the 
source of bondage it is proposed now to enter into a con 
sideration of the sources of emancipation/ viz., invisible and 
visible knowledge. By these two varieties of knowledge 
when ignorance is dispelled, the two varieties of envelop 
ment which enshroud the perception and existence of Para- 
brahma, "It is not manifested," "There is no Parabrahma," 
are also destroyed. 

45. The nature of that knowledge which destroys each 
particular kind of envelopment is now being defined. By 
the invisible knowledge is removed the envelopment of non- 
existence [of the Parabrahma] with its cause ignorance ; and 
by the visible is destroyed want of perception together with 
its cause ignorance. (Invisible knowledge produces the per. 
ception "Brahma is" and this affirmation destroys the negation 
" There is no Brahma." Visible knowledge, on the other 
hand, brings in the perception " I am Brahma," consequently 
as no one can say that he sees not himself, therefore the want 
of manifestibility is removed too]. 

46. With the destruction of want of manifestibility, the 
first form of envelopment illusory attribution of the conditions 
of a Jiva to the supreme self HeJ is an agent, a doer of 
action, etc., are all destroyed and grief and infatuation cease 
altogether to affect [the theosophist]. 

47. With the destruction of the bonds which hurl an 


individual to re-incarnation, all grief and enchantment lose 
their hold, and the theosophist then enjoys contentment and 
supreme felicity. 

48. The Sruti likewise says concerning the realisation 
of content both from a removal of grief and from visible 
knowledge as a condition of the individual " He who knows 
Self to be eternal, free, and no other than the Supreme Brahma 
has no more desire left in him, which to accomplish, he must 
wish-to inherit a fresh body. He acquires supreme content 

49. It has been previously mentioned that visible know 
ledge is divided into two varieties, of which the self-manifesti- 
bility of the subject [of that knowledge] is the first, and the 
visible perception by intellect, the second variety. 

50. As in that first variety self-manifestibility of the 
subject so during invisible knowledge too, the self-manifesti 
bility is equal, therefore in both of them, the existence of the 
self-manifested Parabrahma is established. 

51. Instead of declaring " I am the Supreme Brahma," 
to say " Brahma is" signifies invisible knowledge ; from an 
absence of contradiction it cannot be regarded as an error. 

52. If the subject of the undisputable nature of visible 
knowledge be proved untrue, " There is no Brahma," then the 
visible knowledge is refuted or made to disappear ; but since 
there are no forcible proofs to that end, hence visible know 
ledge is never subjected to refutation. 

53. But there are others who raise objections to the 
reliability j[of visible knowledge. They deny its freedom from 
error ; for say they, from an absence of form in Brahma, 
visible knowledge is a modification of error. But this may 
equally apply to knowledge pertaining to the blissful abode of 
heaven. [Hence it is said] if for an absence of bringing in 
particular knowledge, the visible be regarded to be a form of 
error, then since no particular knowledge can be produced 
of Swarga, but only its existence can ordinarily be made 


known, that should also be erroneous. That is to say, it can 
not be pointed out definitely as "This is the Heaven," but there 
is a perception^ its existence as " Heaven is," therefore this 
ordinary knowledge or perception of the existence of Heaven 
will alike be fallacious. 

54- A third form of error takes this shape. " Brahma is 
properly to be known by the invisible knowledge, hence the 
application of visible knowledge is fallacious." But that is 
not the case. That is to say, the subject of Brahma and 
Its non-difference with each individual self which is fit to 
form the subject of visible knowledge, stands not in the least 
chance of error like the invisible/ And why is visible 
knowledge of Brahma free from error or mistake ? Because 
" Brahma is invisible." In this way, for a want of Its adequacy 
for being visible, the invisible knowledge of Brahma is free 
from fallacy. But why is that knowledge invisible ? Because 
there is a want of that definite perception as " This is 

55. A fourth form of error may arise, and one may say, 
" From a want of accepting a part of the visible is fallacious. 
In other words, notwithstanding the accepting of the parts of 
Brahma, the non-accepting of each witnessing part, from 
the visible knowledge is erroneous. It amounts to this then, 
that the presence of ignorance in any part of knowledge con 
cerning an object is a source of error. If this were to hold 
true, knowledge of a jar, a piece of cloth, [formed bodies,] 
etc., mast alike be erroneous, inasmuch as that knowledge 
cannot occupy all the parts of the jar, etc., [its interior for 
instance]. Thus then bodies with form are necessarily 
revealed partly, while another part remains unknown ; but in 
the case of Brahma which is formless, how can it be said that 
Its parts are not discovered? [The reply is] to impute parts to 
Brahma and reduce it to a presonality is not fit for considera 
tion. From distinction or difference in the parts which are 
fit for being interdicted and arc unfit for being entertained, 


Brahma though formless will be reduced to the condition of 
one with parts. 

56. What are the two parts fit for interdiction ? They 
are non-existence and want of manifestibility [imperceptibility]. 
The first is removed by the invisible and the last by visible 

57. That the invisible knowledge of a subject that is fit 
to be known visibly is not erroneous [the third form of 
error] is established from the following example. As in the 
instance of the "tenth person." " Tenth is," can be called 
clear invisible knowledge. Similarly " Brahma is," an instance 
of clear invisible knowledge, and in both, the envelopment 
of ignorance is alike. (It need hardly be said that as in the 
case of the missing tenth person the assertion of a trustworthy 
person who comes to the spot and says the tenth is [living] 
produces invisible knowledge to his comrades (invisible, 
because he has not pointed out the person yet, and said " This 
is the tenth," or " here is your tenth,") and as that is clear or 
free from error similarly the knowledge produced by the 
expression ^Brahma is [existent ] is clear and free from error ; 
because the envelopment of non-being removed by ignorance 
is equal in both of them. 

58. If words bring forth invisible knowledge what pro 
duces the visible ? From the same source with proper discri 
mination ; as " Self is Brahma." A person who full well 
understands the signification of the phrase has a visible percep 
tion of Brahma. Just as in the case of the tenth person " you 
are the tenth" brings him the visible perception of the tenth.* 

* According to the deductions of works treating on Non- 
duality means for the acquisition of the knowledge differ accord 
ing to the status of the qualified individual ; that is to say, if he 
has advanced a good way and belongs to the first class of qualified 
persons, hearing, consideration and profound contemplation are 
the means of his knowledge. In the case of a person tolerably 


59. Or as in reply to the question who is the tenth person ? 
if you say " you are the tenth," and subsequently counting 
over the number and reckoning yourself you come to recollect 
it, similarly by analysing the phrase, " Self is Brahma," Para- 
brahma becomes visibly perceptible to the mind. 

60. Knowledge produced from due analysis and argument 
is subject neither to inconsistent idea nor doubts. This is 
now being shewn. In regard to the " tenth person" the 
knowledge that I am the tenth" is to be admitted as free 
from conflicting ideas or doubts ; for if a new person were to 
come and place himself in their middle he will never get 
confounded and fail to recognise himself as the tenth, leaving 
aside the stranger. [Similarly in regard to self, knowledge 
produced by the phrase " Self is Brahma" brings in the clear 
perception that his Alma is Brahma, and when this is firmly 
seated in his intellect, he is said to perceive it visibly. 

61. In the first place then the phrase " Brahma is" helps 
knowledge of Its existence, and that is the invisible. Subse 
quently the expression " you are the Supreme Brahma," 
the introduction of person* tends to produce the visible per 
ception of Brahma as non-distinct from him. 

62. In this manner, knowledge of Parabrama can never 
be confounded, when it is once visibly perceived or seated in 
the intellect, either with the five sheaths, foodful and the rest, 
or any thing else. 

63. From the indication of birth, etc., the sage Vrigu 
first obtained an insight of the invisible Brahma; and 

qualified, worship of the Impersonal Brahma without any attributes 
is the means of knowledge. In both instances, keeping up a 
continuous current of the mental function is an uncommon cause 
for knowledge. 

* Vyakti literally means a person ; and as non-duality holds 
every one to be non-distinct from Brahma, hence each non- 
distinct Brahma refers to the individual. 


subsequently by discrimination and direct reference, a clear 
perception, in the following manner. " From Whom these 
elements have been derived, to whom all things owe their life, 
etc, is Brahma." Now then, hearing brought forth invisible 
perception of Brahma as the cause of the origin and destruc- 
of the universe ; subsequently by analysis he discriminated 
It to be distinct from the foodful and the rest of the sacs, so 
that each individual self is Brahma, and accordingly came to 
realize it clearly. 

64. He had received instruction from his father on the 
invisible knowledge of the Supreme Brahma only, and 
though Its visible perception in the form of " Thou art 
Brahma" was never given him, yet by the first method he had 
been taught to hold It to be distinct from the foodful sac, 

65. So that, by ascertaining the unreality of these sacs 
over and oyer, he was led to conclude self to be non-distinct 
from Brahma by Its indications of blissfulness, and realized 
It accordingly. 

66. " Brahma is truth, knowledge and infinite." In this 
manner, after having spoken of the indications, It is further 
described as present in each individual (in the form of Self) ; 
for It is situate inside the five sacs (and he who knows that, 
has no more duality in him). 

67. The twa last verses quoted from the Taitirya Upa- 
nishad render it clear, how in the case of the sage Vrigu, 
knowledge marked by invisibility ultimately led to the visible 
perception of Brahma. It is further corroborated by the 
evidence of the Chhandogya Upaniihad " Indra derived this 
invisible knowledge by the indications of self, in the follow 
ing manner : What is unrelated to the body and action, 
undecaying, eternal, and devoid of grief is Self. Actuated 
with the desire of obtaining visible perception, ,or clear insight 
of the Supreme Brahma, he repaired to (?r#Jfour Hies with 


the usual bundle of fire-wood as a present." (Chhandogya 
Upanishad, Chapter VIII). 

68. The Aitariya Upanishad is also to the same purpose. 
" In the beginning, there was the secondless Parabrahma." 
Now this is an indication of the invisible, for it simply estab 
lishes the existence, and does not particularize It either with 
one thing or another. Hence the subsequent attribution of 
illusion and its withdrawal helps to bring forth the visible 
perception by the indications of that visibility, viz., truth, 
knowledge and infinite. 

69. Other Sruii utterances help the visible knowledge 
of Brahma, as the transcendental phrase does the visible/* 

* It is worth enquiring whether our sense, perception or the non- 
distinction of the inteHigence of a subject, and that of function of 
the internal organ is visible knowledge ? Or whether the know 
ledge of a subject having a present relation with one who gives 
evidence [pramata] is so called ? Carrying the enquiry further 
we may multiply instances : it may be asked whether knowledge 
produced by proper proofs concerning an adequate subject having 
a present relation with the demonstration (pramata) or the un 
caused knowledge of improper and worthless proofs of a proper 
subject wrth a present relation, of the demonstrating intelligence 
(pramana ckattanya) is visible ? Or whether that visible 
knowledge has for its indication that which is conformable to the 
practise of self, non-different from the subject of uncovered in 
telligence [wanting in envelopment] ? That clever Vedantin 
Nischal Dass Swami, the author of Vritti Parvakar, has entered 
into an examination of this indication, but this is hardly the place 
to introduce his metaphysical disquisitions ; suffice it to say, that 
visible knowledge is of two sorts, (a) ascertaining (avij na) and (b) 
recognition (prutyavijna). When from prior impressions and 
connection of sense, a thing is known, it is called recognition 
(pratyavijna). It is of this form "That is this." Here even, 
modification [of the mental function produced by the relation] 
of sensory organ pervades the subject, for which non-distinction 
is produced between the two intelligences, vi*., of the mental 


70. Therefore, for a knowledge of the visibility of Brahma, 
one should always ascertain the significations of the transcen 
dental phrase ; and there can be no contention about it. 

71. The indication of the transcendental phrase * That art 
Thou is now being set forth : Intelligence associated with 
the internal organ sustaining* the perception of Self or 

modification and of the subject. Knowledge proceeding from the 
sensory organ takes the form " This is" it is called (avijna 
pratkshya] known before. But in the principal Siddhanta, prior 
impression of a thing known before as for instance, the knowledge 
conveyed by the expression " That is this," "That," the portion 
represented by that is in the form of recollection, hence invisible, 
and this visible ; for which that is this is a mixture of invisible 
with visible perception and not the latter only. For its being 
external and internal, each variety of visible knowledge is either 
external or internal. Now the former has five more sub-divisions 
from the organ through which that knowledge is brought about : 
aural, cuticular, ocular, palatal, and olfactory. The internal, on 
the other hand, has two sub-divisions, atmogochara and anatmo- 
gochara. The first for its being predicate of self is sub-divided 
into two and the last is into three varieties, on account of indi 
cating the perception of Thou, and That, and their non-difference. 

* We have seen it mentioned three different forms of indica 
tions implied by a word. They require a passing notice, for in- 
tance, " A jar." Here the jar is said to be the subject of both 
its function (a water carrying vessel, etc.,) and the word itself. 
Now the function is situated in the internal organ and the word 
is situated in the tongue and the jar itself rests on the ground, 
so that the three are different ; similarly the function of self 
(aham) and the subject of the word, is intelligence of the internal 
organ Jiva, and here "self" (function) is situated in the internal 
organ, the word has for its site the tongue, and the subject the 
endowed intelligence of the internal organ rests on its own dig 
nity, so that, the function is distinct from the word self. Though 
for that function being subordinate to the mind, it is non-distinct 
from Jiva, yet as there is difference between a jar and its ether, 


individuality and manifested by becoming the subject of that 
word [ Self ]is indicated by the word Thou. In other \vords f 
consciousness manifested in the form of " I am I" the intel 
lectual soul associated with the internal organ and forming 
the subject of that word [ahatn or egoity] is the predicate of 

72. The literal signification of That is now being 
defined. The associated intelligence of Maya which is the 
cause of the Universe, the indication of omniscience, the 
property of invisibility which is existent, intelligence, and 
bliss is the predicate of the word That. 

73. When the same Parabrahma is said to be visible and 
invisible, finite and infinite, limited and whole, that is to say 
with properties naturally opposed to each other, it therefore 
can be ascertained by recourse to Indication [of abondaning 
the conflicting portion]. 

74. As in the phrase "That Devadatta is this," that refers 
to past time and this to the present time, both have 
reference to the same person, but by omitting the conflicting 
element according to the canons of the indication of abandon 
ing a part, Devadatta alone is meant. Similarly by abandon 
ing the conflicting part from the signification of the trans 
cendental phrase "That art Thou" there remains the non- 
conflicting Intelligence which is meant* hence the indication 
of abandoning a part is easily admissible. 

on account of distinction in their nature and properties, similarly 
for the qualification of the mind and the property of its intelli 
gence being distinct, for all practical purposes a difference be 
tween Jiva and the mind or internal organ is maintained, con 
sequently there is distinction- between the function of self and the 
word. Then again the indicative indication of the word self is 
the illumination of function, vie., the uniform intelligence, which 
is entirely different from that function. This is what is meant. 

* That and Thou are marked by the qualities of invisi 
bility and visibility, a result of associate, so if from intelligence, 


75. It is not possible to include the relative and predi 
cated signification in the meaning of the phrase That art 
Thou but as to their referring to one Impartite, there can 
be no question and that has been admitted by all learned 
men. [For instance, in the ordinary phrase "Bring the cow." 
It is said that the verb to bring reminds a person of the 
desire* of the speaker; in short the servant is asked to obey 

which is common to them both, the conflicting element of invisi 
bility and visibility be abandoned, there remains only intelligence. 

That is to say : 

Intelligence-}- Invisibility=Intelligence-h Visibility ; striking off 
invisibility and visibility we have Intelligence=Intel!igence. 

* In Logic the source of the sense of a word depends either 
upon the property of its force or that of its indication. But there 
are four other varieties of sense (i) desire ; (2) fitness ; (3) 
purport; and (4) proximity, connection or relation between two 
proximate terms and the sense they convey ; for instance, "Bring 
the cow/ Here a desire is expressed ; when there is a relation 
between the sense of one word with another, it is called fitness, 
as the [relation of cow with the verb bring, here the relation 
is that of a subject and predicate ; for the person who has been 
asked to bring the cow is the subject of the verb bring which is 
the predicate of that person. Desire of a speaker is called 
purport, when the speaker addressing another orders him to bring 
the Gam, it expresses that desire, in a variety of ways according 
to the time of the day : for example, if it be the time of cooking, 
it should signify fire ; if during bathing it should convey the 
sense of water, and during milking time it would signify a cow, 
etc. Thus then, as ordinary words are construed according to the 
time and other incidents connnected with the speaker, so is the 
purport of Vedic phrases to be ascertained from the commentaries 
in the form of the commencement and termination result, 
novelty, etc. ; and as in human speech the desire of the speaker is 
ascertained, so in the Vedic utterances the purport is Iswara s 
desire. The contiguity of words is called proximity. Strength 
of a fit term and the relation of the property of indication, creat- 


his master s wish by bringing the cow, consequently a relation 
is acknowledged between the words bring and cow, and 
this is the relative signification. Now for the predicate " A 
blue and fragrant lotus." Here the lotus is marked by the 
qualities blue and fragrant/ The transcendental phrase 
That art Thou * is not to be construed like the Blue lotus 
and that is not allowable ; but as one Impartite and pervad 

ing no impediment to remember its sense, is also likewise called 
proximity. In the illustration the two terms cow and bring are 
contiguously placed, likewise the strength creates no impediment 
in recollecting the sense to bring the cow, hence it is proximate. 
Thus then, we find the source or cause of ascertaining the purport 
of a term, depends upon desire, fitness, purport and contiguity 
which are so many causes, and no term can be construed without 
them. This stands true in the case of all words. 

* As for instance, "you bring the cow/ Here there is a 
close connection or say relation between the subject you/ the 
object, cow and the predicate bring ; and the sense is plain 
enough, as it asks another to fulfil the speaker s desire ; and this 
sense with the relative connection is the purport. It is an example 
of proximity. So in the construction of a transcendental phrase, 
it is quite inapplicable, for if it be said let the wordj That indicate 
the meaning of the word Thou and vice versa by relation and 
proximity, then it will tell against other Sruti texts where it has 
been laid down. " That is unassociated, unconditioned." That 7 
is marked by invisibility and Thou refers to intelligence marked 
by visibility, hence the one is incompatible with the other. 

Neither can the sentence be construed literally as the lotus is 
blue/ for here the literal sense suits, inasmuch as between the 
words blue and lotus there is the relation of subject and 
predicate, as blue excludes other colors as white, green, red, etc., 
and lotus, such other substances as cloth, jar, etc. Thus then, we 
see the necessity, why in construing the necessity, why in cons 
truing the sentence That art Thou the use of a subject and 
relation does not apply, and therefore it is to be construed after 
the canons of Indication. 


ing everywhere in all things is the purport admitted by all 
learned men, hence to have recourse to indication is proper. 

76. The meaning of Impartite is thus set forth. Who is 
discovered in the form of each individual intelligence, is 
secondless and blissful ; and who is secondles and blissful 
and discovered in the form of individuated intellect. In other 
words the intellectual soul present in each individual and 
manifested in the form of Witnessing Intelligence is the 
Secondless Supreme Self and full of bliss. And that Supreme 
Self is non-different from, but one with, the individuated Self, 
Intelligence, Intellect, or Perception (Bodha). 

77. When the identity or oneness of Brahma and Indivi- 
dnated Self is thoroughly ascertained [without any lingering 
trace of doubt], then only the meaning of the word Thou 
referring to individuated Self ceases to impart the idea that it 
does not signify Brahma. 

78. And there is likewise a similar cessation of invisibility 
in the signification of That/ That is to say, mistake lands 
the individual into the disbelief of his oneness with Brahma, 
and Brahma is the subject of invisible knowledge. Both of 
them cease when non-duality has been firmly established as a 
result of ascertaining the meaning of Impartite. And if it 
be asked of what use are they ? To make the individuated 
Self occupied in the fullness of bliss. 

79. Thus then, the visibility of the Supreme Brahma 
follows as a result of knowledge of That art Thou and this 
has been clearly established in the aforesaid manner ; if any 
one were to say it is otherwise, and no visible knowledge 
follows, he surely is ignorant of the purport of the inferences 
derived from the Shastras. 

80. If it be said, let the Shastras draw their conclusions 
and build upon them the visible knowledge from the indica 
tion of That art Thou/ but the fact is otherwise and it is 
possible for obtaining invisible knowledge in the same way 
as one knows the blissful abode of heaven, but to say so 


is unjust, as already mentioned in the case of the "tenth 

81. If you attribute invisible knowledge to result from 
That art Thou, it will do away with your visibility and you 
who are engaged in ascertaining the nature of Brahma will 
be invisible. What a fallacy, and how very unnatural your 
inferences are. 

82. As in ordinary usage, it is said, "For increasing it 
one loses his capital," that exactly applies in your case, and 
\ve have an instance of its truth exemplified in your reasoning. 

83. If you say, intelligence of Jiva for its associate of 
the internal organ may properly be regarded as visible, but as 
Brahma is unassociated It cannot be so regarded (visible) : 

84. But Brahma is not so unassociated, because without 
the associated condition, it is impossible to form a conception 
of Its principle or nature, and so long as a person does not 
merge into the Non-dual after death, the associated cannot be 
done away with. 

85. But this need not necessarily indicate there is 
difference in the associates of Jiva and Brahma. The presence 
or absence of the internal organ constitutes that difference in 

86. Just as the presence of the internal organ, [its con 
ditional relationship] forms the associate why is the absence 
or want of that organ to prevent a similar associate ? Now 
here we have an admission and exclusion. The first 
associated existence [the conditional relationship of the 
internal organ] comes under admission, while its want is 
exclusion ; and though both of them are associates, yet there 
is a difference between them of being and not being, existence 
and non-existence, and for this difference they are fit to be 

1 Says Madhusudan Swami. So long as actions continue the 
associate creates the difference in the condition of [Jiva and 
Brahma] and this is said to be the indication of an associate. 


disregarded ; in the same way, as a chain made of gold or 
iron though different so far as the metals are concerned but 
in the matter of inflicting punishment and confining a person s 
motion, they have no difference whatever and therefore no 
attention paid to it. 

87. Professors of Self-knowledge have ascertained both 
admission and exclusion as means to that end. For 
instance, by the exclusion of phenomena [material Universe 
which is non-real and non-existent except in our senses 
illusion] and admission of noumena, [Brahma which alone ig 
real hence being, ] the Vedanta seeks to expound Brahma 
with a view of obtaining self-knowledge.* 

88. But objection may be taken to this view, for it may 
be asked since the Vedanta seeks to expound That (Brahma) 
by the exclusion of Not-That [phenomena] ; similarly for 
a community of reference between the words l ahairi in 
dicating the Uniform Intelligence, and Brahma, introduction 
of the Indication of abandoning a part, will fail to establish 
the perception " I am Brahma." And the reply is, -The indi 
cation of abandoning in regard to individuality applies only 
to the part marked by insentiency, as for instance the physical 

* That refers to Brahma. Not-That signifies the objective 
world. Therefore That is not Not-that, and Not-that is not 
That. This is the method used in expounding the Reality of 
Brahma, and Its eternity, knowledge, and infinity. In other 
words, what is not Brahma, is this vast material expanse, there 
fore this vast expanse is not Brahma. And this is non-existent, 
it exists relatively to our senses, which is an illusion. Fr in 
sleep, we have no more relation with it, and it apparently ceases 
to exist; so in pralaya it exists not, hence it .naturally follows, 
that as it does not exist in all time, it is impermanent, but this 
does not apply to Brahma, for it is Not-That and the properties 
of Not-that cannot be attributed to That which is its extreme 
reverse. Hence Brahma is eternal, etc. In this manner, the 
Vedantin seeks to expound Brahma. 


body, etc., and not to the Uniform Intelligence. [That is 
to say, if the gross body, organs, sensory and active, vital airs, 
mind, and thinking, be excluded from I am I the remaining 
Intelligence is one with Brahma, hence the perception I am 
Brahma is a natural result, 

89. By abandoning the internal organ from the significa 
tion of the word (Aham) egoism or individuality, the remain 
ing Witness Intelligence is rendered visible by the expression 
" I am Brahma." 

90. Though this witness Intelligence is self-illumined, 
yet it is a subject of pervasion by intellect like other insen 
tient subjects, a jar, etc., but the authors of the Shaslras have 
interdicted the employment of the pervasion of result to deter 
mine it. [For, the result refers to the reflected shadow of 
intelligence, and that cannot be required in the case of per 
ceiving what is self-illumined]. 

91. In the case of an insentient object, both the intellect 
and reflected shadow of intelligence situated there, pervade 
that jar ; and the necessity consists in this, that ignorance 
which envelops a jar is removed by intellect, and reflection 
of intelligence renders its visible. 

92. With regard to Brahma the pervasion of intellect- 
function of the internal organ is admitted for the destruction 
of ignorance which rests there, and as it is self-illumined, it 
manifests without the pervasion of the reflected shadow of 
intelligence, a resulting product of intellect. 

93. As for finding out a jar in a dark room, the eyes and 
light of a lamp are both needed, and for that lamp, eyes 
simply are enough ; similarly for the destruction of ignorance 
which envelops it, and for rendering it visible, both the perva 
sion of function and its reflection of intelligence are requisite; 
but for the cognition or discovery of Brahma, the pervasion 
of function is alone necessary. 

91. Though this reflex is situated in function, yet it is 
one with Brahma, and does not produce any increased results 


In it, like what happens in the case of a jar, etc. To be more 
explicit: If, as in function moulded after the shape of a jar, 
there is a reflection of intelligence too in the function moulded 
after Brahma, yet that reflex is not manifested as distinct from 
Brahma, but like the light of lamp overpowered bv the mid 
day sun, it is one with It, hence not a source of increasing 
Its manifestibility.* 

95. In support of the pervasion of function and absence 
of pervasion of the resul,t the evidence of the Vedas is now 
being adduced. " Undemonstrable and unborn." "Brahma 
Is only to be perceived by the mind." "An Intelligent person, 
knows Brahma to be changeless, infinite, uncaused, and un- 
demonstrable (i. e., not capable of being cognised by the 
sensory organs), unexampled, and unborn, is freed from 
re-births." (Sruti). Regarding it, the Amritabindu Upanishad 
says the word undemonstrable is meant to convey the exclu 
sion of the pervasion of result.f 

* Subsequent to knowledge, the individual Intelligence merges 
into the Supreme Brahma and becomes one, but that does not 
produce any increase of results like what follows in the case of 
an insentient object after ignorance has been removed from it by 
that function, and we come to view its several parts both in and 
out, by the reflex intelligence. 

f " Brahma is only to be perceived by the mind." And 
" Which the mind cannot conceive" imply no contradiction. 
Because the mental function can only destroy the Ignorance con 
cerning the Brahma, it cannot discover the absolute; [thus ful 
filling the first condition] and because the reflected Intelligence 
is powerless to discover It (this has already been explained) 
[necessarily, therefore, the mind in such a case cannot conceive 
of it]. On this subject the authors of the Shastras " have in 
terdicted the use of the reflected Intelligence, but Have advised 
to dispel the ignorance which rests on It, by the agency of the 
mental function, for discovering the Supreme Brahma," because 
"It is light itself and therefore for any other object to illuminate 


96. In the opening verse of the present treatise it has 
already been said : " He who knows his individuated self to 
be one with Brahma, has no more desire left in him, to 
gratify which, he is to follow a physical body and grow old." 
Now this perception is called visible knowledge. 

97. Visible knowledge is produced by a right under 
standing of the transcendental phrase That art Thou. But 
10 make it firm, it is necessary again to have recourse to 
hearing consideration and profound contemplation. This 
is the firm conviction of all professors of Self-knowledge. 

98. As for instance, "Till the knowledge of I am Brahma 
is firmly fixed in the perception of an individual, he should 
practise passivity, self-control, and the rest along with hearing, 
consideration, and profound contemplation." 

99. In that firmness of visible knowledge there are obs 
tacles such as impossible ideas and inconsistent or antagon 
istic ideas. 

or discover It, is impossible," [what is Hght cannot be discovered 
by another object]. 

"Between the cognition of an inanimate object, as a jar, a 
cloth, etc., and the cognition of Brahma there is this difference. 
In the first instance (this jar, etc., the mental function assumes 
the shape of, or pervades through, the unknown ja-r and dispels 
the Ignorance which rests there; by its reflected Intelligence, it 
then discovers or renders it visible. As is mentioned in the 
Shaztras : "The mental perception and its indwelling reflex 
Intelligence both occupy the jar, the first dispels the ignorance 
about k, the second brings it out to view, i.e., renders it visible." 
As the light of a lamp taking possession of such articles, a jar/ 
*a clolh r * etc., as occupy a dark corner, dispels the surrounding 
darkness and brings them out to view by ks own- brilliance, so 
the mental function after dispelling the Ignorance which occupies 
an unknown jar, brings it out or renders it cognisable to the 
senses by its indwelling reflex Intelligence." DHOLE S Vedanta- 
sara, p. 43. 


100. If from a difference of desire, and difference in the 
branches* of the Vedas, works and sacrifices enjoined in 
several varieties should cause any etnbarassment or obstruction 
to the firmness of visible knowledge, it is therefore necessary 
that one should repeatedly, over and over, have recourse to 
the means, hearing and the rest. 

101. But what is hearing ? The purport of the Vedanla 
in the beginning, middle and end, deals exclusively on the 
oneness of individual self and Brahma; to know this for 
certain is called hearing. f 

* The Sanskrit word shakha has been converted into branch ; 
of it Rig Veda has 21, Sam 1,000, Yajur 109, and Atharva 50 
branches. Vyas divided one Veda into four parts and subdivided 
them into branches as above ; each branch has had its representa 
tive or follower, then it is difficult to say if it is yet so. But this 
much is certain that the practices enjoined in the several branches 
are not indiscriminately adopted by all alike, but by the particular 
sect who is a follower of that branch, and each branch has one 
Upanishad : generally the names of the branch and its correspond 
ing Upanishad are identical, and we have altogether 1180 Branches 
and Upanishads, of which 840 Upanishads deal on works and are 
called Karmakanda, and 232 treat on the worship of Brahma for 
which they are called Upasanakanda. But authors include devo 
tional exercise in works therefore all the above are classed under 
the Karmakanda leaving 108 which help the cognition of Brahma ; 
and as these are the concluding portions of the Vedas, or contain 
the essence of their doctrines, they are called Vedanta or Jnana- 

j- The means for ascertaining Brahma are : 

1. In the beginning and the end. 

2. Repetition. 

3. Novelty. 

4. Result. 

5. Illustration by praise. 

6. Illustrating by supporting arguments. 


102. In the first chapter of the Shariraka Sutras, Vyas 
defines hearing in the manner just mentioned. What pre 
vents to stem away impossible ideas concerning the oneness 
of individual self and Brahma, that is to be demonstrated, is 
termed consideration in the second chapter of the same work. 

103. The method by which uncomformable ideas regard 
ing non-duality are removed or destroyed is now being 
declared : from settled convictions [impressions] of several 
prior births, and from a consciousness of the physical and 
subtle bodies being none other but self, the reality of objective 
world is apt to arise in the perception over and over. 

104. This is called an uncomformable, inconsistent or 
antagonistic idea, and is removed by an earnestness of the 
mind, i.e., profound contemplation which is produced bj 
devotional exercises on the Brahma with attributes [Personal] 
from the precepts of a professor concerning It. 

105. Since from the worship of the Supreme Brahma is 
produced earnestness therefore the Vedanta insists on the 
propriety of that worship as a means to the practice of earnest 
ness of mind. But if on the other hand, a person receives 
instruction on the worship of the Impersonal Brahma, without 
his having practised earnestness, his devotional exercises will 
help him to that end and there is no doubt about it. 

106. Now the practice of the Impersonal worship is being 
set forth. To think on the light of Brahma, to study the 
utterances on the subject, to fix it in the perception by argu 
ment and analysis, and constantly to meditate on It are called 
the practice of the Impersonal worship. 

107. " A qualified person possessed of the four means 
for the acquisition of self-knowledge and actuated with a 
desire for release, regards each individuated self as the 
Supreme self, and without any trace of doubt left concerning 
their oneness and non-duality, devotes himself earnestly to 
assimilate this solemn truth into knowledge and leaves off 
speaking, dwelling upon, or thinking on things that are no-t 


self : for, speaking entails labor on the tongue, as thinking 
does on the mind." 

108. To the same end, the Sruti says [Gita Chap, ix., v. 
22.] " He who contemplates self to be one with, and non- 
different from Brahma and always worships me [Krishna] in 
that way, for him I bring about the accomplishment of the 
several varieties of Yoga, called acquisition of the unattained, 
and preservation of what has already been attained." 

The Sruti and Smriti are cited by way of illustration : 
For the purpose of keeping away antagonistic ideas, in regard 
to self they insist upon creating an earnestness of the intellect ; 
and that always. 

no. The mistaken notions of the body, organs, etc., 
being identical with self and the reality of phenomena, are 
called antagonistic ideas. It may be asked why ? To account 
for it, the indications of antagonistic ideas are being cited. 
To perceive a thing in a way different from its actual condi 
tion is called antagonistic idea. As for instance, when nacre 
is preceived as silver, its original condition of shell is left 
out of consideration and it is perceived in a different light. 
In the same way, to perceive self to be one with the physical 
body and the rest is to leave out of consideration his actual 
condition and introduce something quite foreign to his nature. 
Similarly, the belief or perception of a disobedient son, that 
his father is his enemy, is an antagonistic idea. 

in. Now self is distinct from the physical body etc., 
and phenomena are unreal, yet to believe in an opposite 
direction and confound him with the body and the rest, and 
to believe in the permanence of the objective world is 
nothing else but an antagonistic idea. 

112. But it has been said, that an antagonistic idea is 
removed by earnestness of the mind. This is now being 
particularly set forth. By constant dwelling on the actual 
condition of self, and considering his difference from the body 
and the rest, as also by regarding the impermanence of all 


material objects ami constantly fixing it in the mind, the 
intellect is cleared of all antagonistic ideas. Hence it is said, 
a person desirous of release should never ceas e to think on 
the impermanence and unreality of phenomena and the 
distinction of self from the body, organs of sense, mind, etc. 

113. A dissenter stops to enquire whether there are any 
rules required, like the performance of devotional exercise, 
for bringing about the perception of distinction of self with 
the body, etc., and the unreality of material phenomena. 
Whether like the recanting of sacred texts, or meditating on 
the image of Vishnu, etc., it is necessary that one should adopt 
certain rules in bringing about the perception of distinction 
of self from the body, etc., and the unreality of the universe, 
or it follows as a matter of course, without the observance 
of any rules like the ordinary practices in vogue amongst 


114. The reply is. To dwell upon the actual condition 
of self and the material universe constantly, requires no other 
rules, because of its result being visibly perceptible. As for 
instance, a person desirous of satisfying the cravings of hunger, 
observes no rules like the performance of a devotional exercise 
to appease it while sitting at dinner, on the other hand, eats 
till he is satiated. 

115. A hungry person whether at his dinner, or without 
ft, or by any other means, out of his own desire appeases it. 
That is to say, when his dinner is ready he eats, when it is not, 
he engages his mind in play or something else, so as to spend 
the time and divert his attention from the pangs of hunger, 
or in conversation or sleep ; anyhow, he eats his dinner out of 
his desire. Therefore the visible result of eating is to appease 
or remove the pangs of hunger, but so far as the Sruti and 
Smriti are concerned, the rules laid down there refer to an 
hereafter (after death) and not for a destruction of the pangs 
attendant on hunger. 

116. The difference between devotional exercise and 


hunger is thus being declared : There are rules to be observed 
because if left undone, sin or de-merit is produced, and if per 
formed indifferently, i.e., the sacred texts pronounced without 
attending to the long and short accents, or incorrectly, they 
fail to produce the desired result ; but on the other hand, 
prove injurious or harmful to the worshipper, as happened to 
Vretrasur from incorrect pronounciation. Thus then, the 
propriety of observing rules in the performance of worship or 
devotion is plainly established. 

117. Antagonistic ideas are a source of perceptible grief, 
like the pangs of hunger, and it is proper, therefore, by some 
means or other, to conquer them. But for that conquest, there 
Is no consecutive beginning. In other words, the grief 
brought about by antagonistic ideas is easily experienced, there 
fore self-evident, and meditation removes it, so that for the 
destruction of that visible grief its result is visible too 
there is no necessity for any rules, but it is proper that one 
should begin to meditate without them. 

118. Now the means for the prevention of antagonistic 
ideas-^to dwell on Brahma constantly, etc., have already 
been mentioned. There are no such rules as are enjoined in 
worship to sit with the face towards the east ; but as in wor 
shipping the Saligram one dwells mentally on Vishnu, so one 
may apprehend the rule here is to produce an unswerving 
earnestness of the mind and to fix it on Brahma. But on that 
concentrating of the mind on Brahma, like contemplation, 
there is no rule nor restraint. 

119. Casting aside thoughts of other objects, to dwell 
constantly with the mind on some particular form of Deva, 
with undivided attention is called Contemplation (Dhyxnd). 
And there are injunctions for practising it, for it removes the 
fickleness or unstability of the mind and steadies it. 

120. As for instance in the Gita (Chapter vi., v. 34.) "Oh 
Krishna ! I confess the mind to be naturally fickle, causing 
want of steadiness ; strong, so as to be unrestrainable ; and 


firm in being led away by good and bad objects as to be well 
nigh impracticable to control it, yet like restraining the air, 
it is with some pain and inconvenience capable of being 

122. Vashista stys in regard to the difficulty with which 
It is subjected : "It is m >re difficult than draining away a sea, 
or uprooting the Golden Mountain (Sumeru), or eating fire, 
and such other feats of tradition." 

122. Like a body restrained from movement by a chain, 
there is no restraint for speaking and thinking on Brahma ; 
on the contrary, history and biography, recording, as they 
do, the lives of great men, create mental enjoyment just as 
the sight of a dance is enlivening. 

123. But that study of history and biography, or hearing 
them read, does not do away with profound contemplation ; 
for self is intelligence only, and is neither the physical body 
nor the sensory organs, etc., which are like the objective world 
material and prone to destruction ; and as the purport of 
historical works and biography go the same way, their literal 
signification, therefore, does not tell against profound contem 

124. Agriculture, commerce, service, etc., together with 
a study of poetical works, fiction, and the Nyaya Shastra pro 
duce distraction of the intellect, inasmuch as it is impossible 
for them to bring in a recollection of the Real Brahma. 

125 126. But it may be asked, eating is also alike in. 
capable of creating a remembrance of Reality, and it should 
be therefore abandoned ? The reply is, there can be no ex 
treme mental distraction from eating, and as after it is over, 
a person comes to remember the Real Brahma, it is therefore 
not to be abandoned. Thus then, since eating creates only 
for the time being, a break of the mental flow of recollection 
which can never be disastrous in its effects, and after it is 
over, the Reality is all at once recollected, it creates no anta- 


^onistic ideas which alone are ruinous, hence not necessary to 
do away with it. 

127. Proofs are now adduced in support of what has been 
said against Poetry, Nyaya Shastra, etc., and their inutility 
to produce a desire of enquiring after self or creating Self- 
knowledge. A person engaged in studying Nyaya has no 
leisure to recollect the Supreme Self. But this does not hold 
exclusively true with regard to it alone ; for* Poetry and Logic, 
inasmuch as they are opposed to self-knowledge, make those 
who study them, forget him altogether. 

128. For which, it is necessary that they should be aban 
doned. To this end the Sruti says : "Know that One-Self 
and leave other discussions [and studies] aside. He is the 
bridge gulfing over eternity and leading to emancipation." 
And " Leave off other words, for they are a source of error ;" 
but constantly abide in him. 

129. If it be contended, since there is no interdiction for 
food, though there is a likelihood of its causing a person for 
get the Supreme Self while in the act of eating, so to do away 
xvith the other Shastras, Logic, Poetry, and the rest is not 
needed. The reply is, since no one can live without food, 
consequently it is impossible to abandon it, though it may be 
opposed to the remembrance of self, very slightly ; but no 
harm to life occurs to a person if he abandons studying the 
other Shastras, save and beyond the Vedanta. Why then show 
such eagerness for their study r Since without it, the mind 
is freed from the shackles of contending doctrines and it 
comes to realise the perception of the secondless Reality. 

130. If it be asked, how could Janak maintain his 
sovereignty, since the administration of state is against self- 
knowledge. The reply is, the king had such a firm knowledge 
of self, that it could not be affected by the duties ot his exalted 
position, though naturally they are conflicting and opposed to 
one another; if your knowledge, be as firm as his, there is 



no restriction for your study or following the occupation of an 
agriculturist, etc., as you may fix your choice upon. 

131. Because, after the world has once been known to be 
unreal and that knowledge has been Confirmed, there is no 
more experience of misery ; a desire of consummation of fruc- 
tescent works alone remains in a theosophist, and from the 
force of them springs his inclination for present actions. 

132. But that does not necessarily imply a theosophtst has 
any inclination for bad or sinful actions. Do not think his 
dependence or fructescent works leads him to sin, they simply 
lead him to perform other works ; even assuming such harm 
ful works being actually done by the overwhelming force of 
fructescent works, there is no resisting them.* 

133. Thus then so far as the consummation of fructescent 
works go, an ignorant person as well as a theosophist are 

* Two opposite doctrines prevail in regard to restraint or im 
munity of restraint. There are texts in the Upanishad which 
clearly maintain, a theosophist is no longer bound by any consi 
deration, he may act as best he likes without having anything to 
dread for their consequence. Because gnosis once arisen destroys 
the seeds of future re-birth and he is freed in life, only waiting 
for his emancipation to become an accomplished fact after he parts 
with his body. Our author is against it, and he contends, in 
that case what is the difference between a theosophist and a dog 
that lives on impure food ? Nrisinha Sarasawati says, rn the face 
of the texts of Revelation and tradition it is impossible to deny 
the immunity of a theosophist from all restraints, but it is never 
intended that he should act thus. They are simply eulogistic of 
knowledge. In this connection it remains to be observed that there 
are three sorts of actions mentioned in the Systems, viz.. Accumu 
lated (Sanchita) t Fructescent (Prarabdhtt), and Current (Kriya- 
mana}. The first and last are destroyed by knowledge, leading 
unaffected the second which can only be exhausted by enjoying 
happiness or suffering misery according to the merit or de-merit 
of a prior birth. 


equally circumstanced. If this be contended, their difference 
is now being declared, to remove it. Though equally placed 
in that respect, yet a theosophist is patient in his suffering, 
while an ignorant person is impatient and always clamours 
for the grief he is subjected to suffer, as a retribution for past 
actions which have already commenced to bear fruit in the 
present life. 

134. For example, two persons travelling on a road miss 
their way, their destinations are different, but one of them 
who knows that he cannot be very far from the village he is 
bound for, with patience continues to walk, and arrives soon, 
while the other ignorant of how much distance, he has yet to 
cover sits by the road-side to rest. 

135. One who has a tangible perception of self, and done 
away with the usual mistake of connecting him with this or 
that, (the physical body, organs of sense, etc.,) has no more 
desire left in him for enjoyment. He therefore feels no grief 
for whatever happens to his body. 

136. After knowledge has arisen, when the objective world 
and its contents are reduced to impermanence, and regarded 
unreal, a theosophist has no desire for anything left, and in 
the absence of a desired object, his desire is said to cease ; 
consequently for him there can be no grief or misery [from 
unfulfilled gratifications]. Just as a lamp is extinguished from 
want of oil, so are his desires extinguished from want of 
objects of desire, and with their destruction his grief too is 

137. But it may be asked, how can want of desired ob 
jects produce want of desire ? Things produced in a magical 
performance, from illusion, are never desired by any one, on 
the other hand, they are discarded and thrown, away simply 
because they are known to be false.* 

* Juggler s art flourished to perfection in India, centuries 
hence ; they would create a Mango tree in your presence with 


138. Similarly a man of discrimination and judgment 
is never led away by the fascination of sandal, garland and 
other sensuous enjoyments, though at first they appear to be 
very pleasant; but on the contrary, shews an aversion, by 
considering the impermanence of such pleasures, and he 
desires them not. [In this way, to attribute the usual defects 
which all pleasures have naturally in them, is a potent cause 
of creating supreme indifference for them, which is the key to 

139. These defects are now being pointed out. For the 
acquisition of wealth a person has to suffer many hardships, 
he must go abroad, serve somebody, flatter his vanity or 
caprice, etc., its accumulation is also attended with several 
disasters, it excites the envy of some, and cupidity of others, 
it is to be protected from thieves and robbers, then again 
when it is lost, a person s grief knows no bounds. 

140. Where is the beauty in a woman ? She is made of 
flesh and tendons, fickle in nature ; and in her wonderful organ, 
there is nothing very exquisite. 

141. What have thus been mentioned in connection with 
wealth and women, apply with equal force to all objects, and 
in the Shastras these defects have been declared, so that men 
constantly dwelling on, or considering them, may shew an 
aversion for material enjoyment and beget indifference. 

142. A person may be extremely pressed by hunger, yet 
that would not make him desirous of eating poison for satisfy, 
ing his cravings of food; how then can a person of discrimi 
nation who has quenched his thirst with sweets, ever shew the 
least inclination to take a dish of poisoned food, knowing 
poison to be there ? [In other words, a man of discrimina 
tion knows all sensuous enjoyments to be poisonous, and his 

blossom and fruit, and present them to you pressing you to taste, 
but no one shews any inclination, because he knows the fruit to 
be no mango at all. 


thirst for them having already been satiated with a full know., 
ledge of their impermanence and defects, he has no more 
desire for them.] 

113. From a predominating influence of fructescent works 
though a theosophist may be actuated with a desire of enjoy 
ing material comforts, yet such enjoyments bring him pain, 
instead of pleasure, just as in the case of a forced and unpaid 
working man, he finishes his allotted task with difficulty ex 
periencing pain instead of pleasure. 

144. And in the midst of that consummation of the> 
fructescent, a theosophist with faith in knowledge of Brahma 
but a family man to, always repeats mentally that his fruc 
tescent has not even exhausted then, and longs for the day 
when it wi]l be so. 

145. Now this grief of a theosophist is no indication for 
a longing for the good things of life and regret for the sorrows 
which his fructescent works are bringing forth, on the contrary 
it is his supreme indifference for the good and unpleasant, and 
utter disregard of happiness or its reverse ; because he is 
devoid of illusion and hence free from longing. 

146. Then again, in the midst of consummation of the- 
fructescent he suffers pain and therefore he is satisfied with 
a small share of enjoyment for his discrimination of its tran 
sitory duration, unlike the ignorant who are never satiated, 
though they may have it infinitely [without end]. 

147. To clear away the misapprehension of an ignorant 
person being satiated with enjoyment and the inutility of 
discrimination which makes a theosophist satisfied with little,, 
it is said in the Sruti, " Desire of enjoyment can never cease 
from the acquisition of the object desired, but like butter 
poured in fire, the more a person enjoys, the more he is. 
desirous of fresh objects of enjoyment to acquire." 

148. If the desired object be known to be temporary in 
duration and the happiness it yields will be short-lived, then 
only will it produce satiety ; just as serving a thief, knowing 


him to be so, makes him a friend and he is no more a thief 
to his accomplice. 

149. To a person whose mind has been duly subjugated, 
and senses restrained or kept away from sensuous objects, 
little enjoyment is enough, for he knows to a certainty the 
defects attending it, which are a source of misery. Therefore 
with a fear of avoiding such inconvenience and pain which 
all enjoyments have in them, he is satisfied with little, as his 
share of pain will also be thus minimised : 

150. Like a king attacked by a combined force of some 
of his brother chiefs, despoiled of territories and satisfied with 
the little that remains, which he considers to be ample, but 
till he was so attacked and despoiled, his kingdom he re 
garded to be small and insufficient. 

151- If it be alleged how can the fructescent works pro 
duce in a theosophist a desire of enjoyment, since he knows 
clearly from discrimination the usual defects inherent in it? 

152. There is no inconsistency whatever in it; for ac 
tually we find a variety of fructescent works caused by desire, 
absence of desire, and at the instance of a second person s 

153. These are now being particularly declared. As an 
instance of the first variety, who may mention the desire of 
a patient or invalid to eat what is unwholesome ; of a thief 
to steal ; of a profligate to enjoy the king s daughter. They 
know the gratification of such desires will bring forth evil 
consequences, yet from a force of fructescent they are engaged 
in them : hence they are called fructescent works caused by 

154. Even Iswara is incapable of preventing them from 
taking effect as pointed eut by Sree Krishna in his discourse 
with Arjuna (Vide Gifa, Chapt., vi. v. 35). 

155. Since therefore a theosophist is subject to the fruc 
tescent, what more is to be said of others; all beings are 
equally affected by them. But then it may be asked, if every 


one of us be entirely dependent upon our fructescent works, 
Of what avail is mental restraint and subjugation of the sensed 
by the practice of Yoga ? 

156. If there would have been the slightest chance 
of influencing the future course of the fructescent, neither 
Ramachandra, Yudhisthira, nor Nala of Parana celebrity, 
would then have suffered such extreme and unbroken miseries 
for several years in succession, as they did. 

157. And the impotency Of Iswara to influence or control 
them, does not create any discord in his sovereignty or uni 
versal control, for it was his wish that fructescent works would 
continue to bear fruit, and know of no interruption or modi 
fication from any extraneous influence. 

158. The second variety of fructescent woi ks caused by 
an absence of desire, is mentioned in Krishna s discourse with 
Arjuna, in the third chapter of the Gita, commencing with 
verse 36111. Hear what he says- : 

159. Asks Arjuna: When a virtuous man is forced to 
do a sinful act, like a thief compelled to work in prison, who 
Or what compels him ? 

160. Krishna. Desire produced by the active quality of 1 
the individual, is the cause of destroying meritorious actions 
and bringing forth injury or de-merit. Anger is another modi 
fication of desire, the two incite a person to sinful actions : 

161. Therefore Arjuna, when you desire not to do a" 
thing, your fructescent will make you entirely subservient to 
your desire and anger, and induce you to do that ; there is no- 
doubt about it. 

162. When there is neither desire nor absence of it, to do 
a thing, but simply for benefiting a third person, one is in 
duced to do it, and thus made to experience either happiness 
or its reverse, it is called fructescent works created by a desire 
of [benefiting] another. 

163. Thus then, as from force of fructescent works even 
the wise are not free from desire, it may be contended, how 


tan it tally with the Srutt, where its absence is maintained 
thus, " What more he is to desire ?" But this is conceived in 
error, for the utterance of the Sruti goes to establish not want 
of desire, but simply its want of potency to create any incli 
nation for further enjoyments, just as parched grains are 
deprived of fruit-bearing powers or germination. 

164. That is to say, as parched grains are incapable of 
germinating and producing any crop, so a theosophist s desire, 
though present, is incapable of producing any inclination 
for frail works,* inasmuch as knowledge has established the 
impermanence or unreality of all objects, and thus stands in 
collision of its fructifying. 

165. It is impossible to maintain an opposite doctrine, 
and to say, since a theosophist is never desirous of enjoying 
any fruits, he has virtually no desire : for as in the case of 
parched grains, though incapable of producing a crop yet are 
they capable of being exten and are fit food for men, so does 
a theosophist s desire produce little enjoyment and bring forth 
no calamity. 

1 66. His fructescent works are exhausted (from consum 
mation) by enjoying their fruits, therefore they produce no 
calamity, which follows only, when from ignorance, a person 
is deluded into the belief of reality of all objects which he is 
desirous of enjoying, and there is no end of such desire, 
Virtually he is never satiated. 

167. And that calamity assumes pretty often this shape. 
" Let my enjoyments never come to an end, but let them 
gradually increase, and there be no impediment to^hem. I 
consider myself blessed in having so many things to enjoy." 

* Frailty arising from desire Granger inclndes ten vices coming 
under calamity, as : hunting, gambling, day-sleeping, calumny, 
shoring, dancing, singing, placing, idle-roaming, drinking. Fate 
comprehends eight : depravity, violence, injury, envy, malice, 
abuse and assault. 


Mistakes like these, occurring in the ignorant, are a fruitful 
source of calamity, misfortune and frailty. 

168. Its means of destruction are now being declared. 
To ponder in mind and unceasingly to confirm the belief that 
fructescent cannot by any power be prevented, and what is to 
happen, cannot be anyhow avoided, and what is not to be, 
can never come to pass, causes the destruction of the poison 
of constant thoughts as to when shall my troubles cease, and 
better days dawn. 

169. From an absence of particular distinction] between 
the wise and ignorant, so far as present enjoyments brought 
about from the fructescent are concerned, how can calamity 
be said to befall the ignorant and not affect the wise ? What 
is the cause of this difference? Enjoyments though equal, 
yet an ignorant person is subject to the illusion of reality of 
all objects of enjoyment to which the wise is not, therefore 
calamity affects the former and not the latter, who is devoid 
of ignorance, and determination, for the acquisition of material 
well-being riches, property and the rest. 

170. A theosophist knows the unreality and imperma- 
nence of all objects of enjoyment, for they are material and 
liable to destruction, he therefore minimises his desire, and 
begets no inclination for an extensive sphere of enjoyment, 
nor is he bent after its pursuit; under such circumstances how 
can evil befall him ? 

171. But it may be alleged, how can a false object pro 
duce perception of happiness which follows during its enjoy 
ment ? Therefore it is said, his desire of enjoyment can 
never be reduced. To this contention the reply is : How can 
a theosophist have any regard for the objective world which 
is material and impermanent, as unreal as objects seen in a 
dream or in a performance of magic ? 

172 173. With the experience of dreaming and waking 

in his own person, and constant study of the unreality of the 

universe, though it appears as a living reality while awake, 


he has cetsed to be convinced of its reality, and takes it all 
for a dream, consequently he heeds it not, and pays very 
little regard. 

174. This indescribable universe, made of matter, is but 
an illusion, like objects seen in a magical performance; from 
a firm conviction of the unreality of phenomena, in this way, 
he keeps off all illusions as to their reality, and as a result, 
whatever enjoyments he may have from his fructescent worki, 
produce no calamity to him. 

175. For, the knowledge of unreality of phenomena is a 
helping cause for Self-knowledge : while fructescent works are 
only a source of enjoyment or suffering for an individual. 

176. Thus from a natural difference in the effects they 
produce, self-knowledge and fructescent works are not opposed 
to each other; for, we find a person deriving pleasure and 
amusement from the sight of a magical performance, though 
he knows the things produced are all unreal. Thus for a 
difference of subjects, fructescent works do not stand in the 
way of Self-knowledge. 

177. When an ignorant person enjoys the fruits of ac 
tions already commenced to bear fruit, with a firm convic 
tion of the reality of the world in spite of its impermanence, 
such knowledge is destructive of Self-knowledge. And his 
conviction of reality cannot make it real when it is naturally 

178. As dream-objects though naturally unreal, are en 
joyed, so are unreal objects of the waking condition to be 
regarded as capable of being enjoyed. 

179. If knowledge of Supreme Self could destroy all en 
joyable objects it would then cause destruction of fructescenl 
works and be regarded in that light: virtually it does no such 
thing, it simply establishes their impermanence and unreality, 
and does not cause their destruction, therefore Self-knowledge 
is no antagonist or destroyer of the fructescent, 


t8o. As without the destruction of a thing produced in a 
magic show, its very sight causes mirth to a spectator though 
he knows it to be unreal ; so without the destruction of all 
objects of enjoyment, self-knowledge offers no impediment to 
their enjoyment, with a simple knowledge of their unreality 
from the force of fructescent works. 

181. If it be said, repeated mention is made in the Sruti, 
of a man of discrimination reaching that stage when he re 
gards everything non-different from self ; in such a state who 
is then to see, hear, or smell, and what is he to.speak ? 

182. Therefore, when there is no possibility for gnosis to 
arise without destruction of phenomena, how can a knower 
of the Secondless Brahma, non-distinct from self, be said to 
enjoy objectively ? 

183. Listen to the reply that is being given. The above 
Sruti text has no reference to the period when a person is 
engaged in the acquirement of knowledge, for it is distinctly 
mentioned in the Shariraka Sutras (Chapt. iv., Sutra 16,) 
as an illustration of profound slumber and emancipation ; of 
them, the dependence of either one, as subject of that condi 
tion when he regards everything to be self, is maintained in 
the Sruti. 

184. If that is not admitted, Yajnavalkya will cease to be 
a professor, because when he sees the external world, his 
knowledge of non-duality is virtually at an end, and when he 
sees it not, no words can flow. [In other words, if no regard 
be paid to the explanation just given about profound slumber 
or emancipation, there would be no professor of self-know 
ledge, for in the waking condition he is practically related to 
the external world, his knowledge of its illusion is then at an 
end ; and when he sees it not, from want of adequate words to 
help the perception of his pupils, his words would cease to 
instil into their minds knowledge of non-duality, so that 
the traditional doctrine of the efficacy of knowledge will bt 


185. If you regard that variety of profound unconscious 
meditation when there is no distinction kept up between 
knower, knowledge, and the subject to be known, for this 
want of perception, as visible knowledge* of self, why is not 
profound slumber to be equally regarded ? 

1 86. If you contend, there is want of knowledge of self 
in profound slumber, and hence it is not admitted as know 
ledge, that is to say, the external world then ceases to exist 
relatively to the individual, and for want of a subject to cover 
or take possession of self, profound slumber cannot be looked 
upon as knowledge, it virtually amounts to an exclusion of phe- 

* There are two varieties of knowledge, the invisible and 
visible. " Brahma is" is an instance of the first, " I am Brahma," 
of the second kind : the invisible destroys the non-being of 
Brahma, visibility destroys ignorance with its trammels. 

" The non-being of Brahma, due to envelopment/ is des 
troyed by the knowledge of the invisible kind, which clearly 
defines Its existence by the expression " There is Brahma." For 
the two are antagonistic to each other, and cannot co-exist ; 
hence the admission of the existence of Brahma, must do away 
with Its non-existence or non-being; and as such a perception is 
dim and vague, (nothing definite) it is called invisible. " I am 
Brahma" is a definite perception, hence it is called visible know 
ledge [or knowledge marked by visibility] ; and it causes the 
destruction of ignorance with its trammels. For this knowledge 
is antagonistic of that ignorance which says "I know not Brahma," 
and of that other kind, which declares "There is no Brahma." 
" It cannot be cognized" varieties of concealment or envelop 
ment as have just been remarked ; and to the declaration "I am 
not a Brahma," but an agent of virtue and vice, and an instru 
ment for enjoying weal or suffering woe, i.e., the same asjiva, 
which is a mistake ; and these are the trammels or nets of ignorance 
which cannot exist with the real, definite, and visible perception 
of Brahma, which is expressed by " I am Brahma." DHOLE S 
Vicharsagar, p. 117. 


nomena and perception of "I am I" as knowledge. And such . 
is fit to be considered so, for I have a similar purport too. 

187. If you say, knowledge of non-duality and total for- 
getfulness of phenomena, the two combined, constitute Self- 
knowledge; all insentient objects, a jar, a cloth, etc., would 
in that case form half subjects of knowledge, for though 
virtually they cannot claim any knowledge of non-duality, yet 
it is quite natural to credit them with the forgetfulness of the 
external world. 

188. Thus then, as in the case of jar and other insen 
tient objects, there is total frightfulness of the external world 
[they have no cognition to take hold of it] so you can never 
have a similar forgetfulness of phenomena in profound medi 
tation, for there are thousand and one cause for distracting 
your mind, as for instance, buzzing of musquitoes, etc. 

189. If you abandon the position you seek to maintan of 
knowledge of non-duality and forgetfulness of phenomena, 
the two together, constituting Self-knowledge and admit know 
ledge of self to be supreme, may you live long, for that 
amounts to an admission of what I have been contending for : 
and as I hold earnestness of the mind necessary to that 
supreme knowledge of self, may you be successful in it. 

190. Since visible perception of phenomena is an illusion, 
a theosophist s desire of enjoyment is therefore not firm, for 
he knows it to be impermanent, and it is consequently unlike 
that of ignorant persons, who are firm in their desire. 

191. Two distinct doctrines prevail in the Shastras, for 
instance, " Desire is characteristic of the ignorant,"* and " Pas 
sions and desires are found even in a theosophist," but they 
are not meant to imply any contradiction. For, desire is the 
play-ground of the internal organ, and as the cavern of a tree 

* As from the sight of smoke in a mountain the nataral in 
ference is the presence of fire in it, so is the presence of fond 
attachment a sign or indication of the ignorant. 


containing fire* kills it, by destroying its sap, and its greenness 
Is gone ; so do the sacred writings interdict passions and 
desires in the wise, for they are detrimental to emancipation. 
Hence it is said, when their purport is gathered, and cognition 
of the Secondless Reality firmly established, a person is no 
longer affected by his desires, because they are- simply the 
attributes of the internal organ. But then, as a theosophist s- 
desires are not firm, consequently their want is established, 
hence admission and interdiction of a theosophist s desire in 
the sacred writings, as they refer to firmness or firm attach- 
ment (which he has not) and its want, does not signify any 
opposite condition, but simply want of fond attachment. 

192. As the unreality of phenomena is firmly established 
in the wise, so is his knowledge of self, being unconditioned 

* If from some cause or other, there be fire in the cavern of 
a tree, its sap is destroyed: so is tranquility of mind destroyed 
by desire produced from ignorance of the Supreme Self and hig 
distinction with the individual spirit or Atma, therefore it is said 
to be his sign. A theosophist s desire is not firm, that is to say, 
from a relation of its proximate cause, the internal organ, and a 
similar relation with the material cause, its friendly object, an 
exclusive want of desire is called unfirm desire. An ignorant 
person has also his relation with the internal organ but no want 
of desire ; we feel no desire in sound sleep, but there is no relation 
of the internal organ too ; impressions only continue then. In 
the ignorant, notwithstanding a relation of the internal organ, a 
desire is absent when trying for the accomplishment of an object, 
but there is no recollection of objects conformable or friendly and 
adjacent or near. A similar relation with the internal organ and 
conformable objects are found to be present along with a theoso 
phist s desire when he rs not in the discriminating mood, but that 
is not constant or exclusively so. In the Gita (Chap, u., v. 59,) 
is mentioned, " Desires cease in an individual after the cogni 
tion of Brahma." Hence unfirm desires of a theosopliist are 


and unrelated, he his no more desire for any object ; therefore 
it is said : "What more is he to desire and continue attached 
to the body ?" It is not to be supposed, want of objects 
produce cessation of desire ; on the other hand, from an 
absence of agent or instrument of enjoyment, desire is des 
troyed : and that does not signify the death or destruction of 
the agent, but only his instrumentality of enjoyment. 

193. "A husband and wife are not desired for their grati 
fication, but for enjoyment of Self." Sruti. In other words, 
affection for wife or son does not proceed from any other 
motive but self-interest; a person has his own desires to serve, 
therefore the above passage from the Sruti, like similar others, 
are intended to show desire for wife and children, husband, 
and other objects proceed not for making them enjoy happi 
ness, but for the happiness of one s own self. But it may be 
objected, as self is not an instrument or agent, it is futile, to 
do away with the idea of his enjoyment ; though this is a fact, 
yet prior to gnosis has arisen, he is apt to be taken for an 
instrument, and individual experience likewise establishes it. 
This is again corroborated by the above Sruti text. 

194. Who is the agent? Whether the Uniform Intelli 
gence or its reflected shadow is so, or the two together com 
bined ? Now as regards the first, it is clearly untenable, be 
cause Uniform Intelligence is unassociated and unrelated : 

195. Because .enjoyment is a modification of conceit in 
happiness and its reverse ; and as the Uniform Intelligence 
is subject to no modification (it is unchangeable) therefore 
if it were to be an instrument of enjoyment, its uniformity 
will be destroyed and it will then be subject to change, and 
change cannot abide in uniformity the two are opposed to 
one another. To be more explicit : Enjoyment of happi 
ness and misery assumes this shape "I am happy," "lam 
miserable," etc., for which it is called a changed condition of 
conceit, in the form of happiness or its reverse. Now intelli 
gence that is uniform, and knows no change, cannot be con- 


nected with that conceit, inasmuch as change does not reside 
in the same place with uniformity, for they are naturally 

196. Neither can reflex intelligence be regarded as an 
instrument. Because though dependent on Intellect which 
is always undergoing change, and for that, it is possible to 
attribute changeability to it, yet as a reflected shadow, it can. 
not abide independently of the Uniform Intelligence ; but as 
this one is no instrument, its shadow, the reflex intelligence can 
neither be so. Then again, as there can be no mistake of 
snake without a rope being present, here rope is the abiding 
substance on which the snake is attributed through illusion 
so without Uniform Intelligence being present, there can be 
no reflex, and this one cannot be mistaken for that other. 

197. Thus then, if neither the Uniform Intelligence nor 
its reflected shadow be an instrument, the two together are 
practically regarded so, though in point of truth they are not. 
"This one is unassorted." The cognitional sheath is a 
subject of the vital airs, etc." From these texts, self is estab 
lished as one unconditioned, and Intellect is a manner of 
witness. Therefore, one may object to the view taken, and 
apprehend truly also, about the two Intelligences together, as 
instrument, and not a mere matter of popular belief. The 
Sruti never intended to establish the truth of such instru, 
mentality or agency, therefore to say, the nature of such agent 
is true, is improper. In the same manner, has the Sruti done 
away with the agency beginning with self and ending in the 
Uniform Intelligence. [As will appear in the sequel.] 

198. King Janak enquired of Yajnavalkya who is sel ? 
The sage pointed out one after the other, beginning with the 
cognitional sheath * and ending in the unassociated, for help- 

* There are five sheaths each of which is regarded as Self, 
Yajnavalka refuted them by demonstrating arguments and proofs, 
one by one, thus helping te instil in the mud of his pupil a correct 
knowledge of self ultimately, by the passage q-ioted " This one etc." 


tag him to comprehend, finally resting on the text, "This one 
is unassociated ;" and that unassociated Uniform Intelligence 
is Self. [Brih-adaratiyak UpanishadJ] 

199. There are other Sruli texts in the Aitarcya Upa- 
uishad and elsewhere to the same purpose. " Who is Self 
that is to be worshipped?" Beginning with the associate of 
the internal organ, and ending in the Uniform Intelligence, 
this one has been declared to be self, after thorough analysis, 
in the Upanishad above named. Therefore, if the method 
used there be followed closely, it would appear, the Uniform 
Intelligence and its reflected shadow the two are not agents : 
and in point of truth, the former is unassociated, hence neither 
an instrument nor an agent. 

200. If the attribution of an enjoyer to self be false, how 
and why does an individual experience it to be a fact ? From 
want of [discrimination of self, the truth of the Uniform 
Intelligence is attributed to the two, and from illusion ac 
tually regarded as an enjoyer with hardly a desire for aban 
doning enjoyment, knowing such enjoyment to be real a 

201. For his self-enjoyment, an enjoyer desires to have a 
wife and vice versz even in the Sruti we find a confirmation 
of this popular belief, 

202. All enjoyable things are dependent on him, there 
fore to shew any attachment for them is vain; on the other 
hand, it is advisable, there should be no desire for them but 
only for self, who is the principal enjoyer, true and free. 

203. On this subject the evidence of the Purana is as 
follows : 

" The attachment which ignorant persons have for material 
objects, which are not eternal, Lord, do out of thine grace I 
beseech thee, impart me a similar firm attachment for thee, 
so that I may never forget thee from my heart. * 

204. In this manner, by discrimination, after all fond 
dqsires for non-eternal objects have been abandoned, one is 



indelibly to fix his love on the true nature of the real enjoyer 
and thus know him. 

205. As from forgetfulness of self, the ignorant fix their 
attachment firmly on objects of senses, garland, sandal, wife, 
clothing, and gold, so is a theosophist to fix and concentrate 
it on the real nature of the enjoyer (self) ; and he forgets 
him not. 

206. As one desirous of victory over his rivals, is always 
engaged in the study of Dramatic works, Logic, etc., so does 
a person desirous of release study discrimination of Self. 

107. As a man of faith is engaged in devotional exercise 
and sacrificial works, enjoined in the Shastras, with a desire 
of acquiring the blissful abode of heaven, so does the emanci 
pated show his faith in self. 

208. As a Yogi with much perseverance and labour ac 
quires the power of concentrating his mind on one object, so 
does an emancipated person fix his attention on the Real 
Brahma, with the object of acquiring lightness and heavi 
ness, etc. 

209. As repetition of practice leads to skilfulness in those 
desirous of victory, men of faith, and Yogis] so does discri 
mination of self, by repetition, clear him of all mistakes and 
purify self-knowledge in the emancipated. 

210. Then a person of discrimination by analysing the 
real nature of the enjoyer inferentially and differentially, 
knows the witnessing Uniform Intelligence to be unassociated 
and unconditioned, in waking, dreaming and profound slum 
bering conditions. 

211. For example. Whatever objects are experienced 
in the three conditions of waking, dreaming and profound 
slumber (be they gross, subtle or in the form of felicity), for 
the purpose of enjoyment, that experience is present only in 
that particular condition where they are seen or felt, though 
the witness who is to cognise, is present in all conditions. 


And against this, there is no dissentient voice for it is the uni 
versal experience, 

212. Now in reference to inferential and differential ana 
lysis for the discrimination of self, the Vedas are proofs too. 
With this purpose the Sruti testimony is being cited. "That 
self when he cognises the enjoyable objects of any of the 
three conditions is not transferred by them from one state to 
another ; they continue* where they are, but he passes over to 
another state, without taking hold of virtue and sin, and their 
results, happiness and misery." 

213. " Brahma, which is ever-lasting intelligence and bliss, 
and witness, discovers all objects in the three conditions of 
time, waking, dreaming and dreamless slumber ; and That am 
I." "I am neither intellect nor reflection of intelligence nor 
any thing else besides." He who has come to identify self in 
this manner, is freed from the usual mistake of confounding 
him with an agent and instrument. 

214. Self is one in all the three conditions, and with dis 
crimination one who has come to realize him as distinct 
and separate from them, is no more subjected to birth and 

215. Whatever enjoyable things are to be found in those 
conditions and whatever enjoyments may proceed from them 
to their enjoyers,* self is over and above, that is to say, quite 
distinct from them, he is intelligence and supreme felicity, and 
That am I. 

216. Who then is the enjoyer ? 

From what has been said in regard to the discrimination 
of self, it would appear that the literal signification of the 
word " cognitional" referring as it does to the reflex intelli 
gence, for its being subject to change is the enjoyer. 

217. "This reflex intelligence is illusory or material." 

* Viswa, Taijas and Prajna are the enjoyers. Enjoyments 
are gross, subtle and falicity. 


(Srw/j .) Experience confirms it too. Because the objective 
world is material and reflex intelligence (Jiva} is included 
in it. Like things produced in a magical performance both 
are unreal. 

218. In trance and profound slumber, the reflex intelli 
gence is destroyed, and that is experienced by the Witnessing 
Uniform Intelligence. If it be asked, What benefit can the 
experience of its destruction bring forth ? It is therefore said, 
a person is led over and over to consider what his self really is. 
In other words, the remnant of consciousness abiding in pro 
found slumber experienced by a person on rising " I was 
sleeping soundly and knew nothing then" proves self to be 
no other than the Uniform Intelligence, unchangeable and 
indestructible : but this reflected shadow is subject to change 
and liable to destruction, for it is unreal, because material. 

219. Thus then, having ascertained the unreality of the 
enjoyer [reflex intelligence] a person no more desires for any 
enjoyments; just as a person on his death-bed never desires 
to marry. 

220. And as prior to knowledge he was accustomed to 
say " I am the enjoyer," but like a person with a split nose he 
is now ashamed and says, "Even now my fructescent works 
are bearing fruit." Thus he suffers them to have their course 
with patience. 

221. When therefore the reflex intelligence [Jiva] is 
ashamed to be reckoned as an enjoyer, he attributes it to the 
witnessing intelligence abiding in him. Therefore it is futile 
to ask who is the enjoyer ? 

222. Thus then, it would appear from the preceding verses 
that the Sruti text " for what desire etc.," has its purpose in 
interdicting the belief of an enjoyer. Both the Uniform and 
Reflex Intelligences are truly, no enjoyers ; ignorance attributes 
enjoyment to them, so that when gnosis has arisen, a person 
has no more desire of enjoyment left in him : hence it is sai-1, 
subsequent to knowledge, what desires would attach a person 


to his body and make him follow the bent of its inclina 
tions ? None. 

223. That a theosophist is never attached to his body, nor 
is affected by its pains is now being declared by a passing 
reference to the three varieties of body and their pains. Every 
individual has three varieties of bodies, physical, subtle and 
cause; and each of them has its separate ailments. 

224. The diseases of the physical body are apparent 
enough, they are innumerable, and produced from wind, bile 
and mucus; among the symptoms are to be found bad smell, 
disfiguration, burning of the body, huskiness of the voice, and 
several others, which every one has experience of. 

225. Those of the subtle body are desire, anger, covetous- 
ness, bewilderment or distraction, pride, and passivity, self- 
control, abstinence, endurance, intensity of thought and faith ; 
they are called diseases, inasmuch as the presence of the 
former and want of the latter (passivity and the rest) are 
equally productive of pain. 

226. The diseases of the cause-body are now being 
cited from the Chhandogya Upanishad. When .Ignorance, the 
material cause of the universe is destroyed in profound slum 
ber, a person can no longer know either himself or another, 
but the seed for. future misery which continues to abide 
even then, is called disease of the subtle body ; so Indra said 
to Brahma. 

227. Now these varieties of diseases are naturally con 
nected with the three different bodies, inasmuch as in their 
absence, the bodies cannot last. 

228. - Just as with the separation of its yarn, a cloth cannot 
continue, and with that of earth, a jar is destroyed; so with 
the separation of diseases, the body is destroyed. 

229. Neither the reflex intelligence, which is Jiva, nor 
the Witnessing Intelligence, which is ISWARA, has got any 
disease, as will appear immediately. 

230. It is impossible for any disease to affect the intelli- 


gence of the individual ; for no discrepancy can effect its 
natural illumination. Since therefore, the reflected shadow 
of intelligence is devoid of disease, its counterpart, the Witness 
or Uniform is likewise free from it. And whatever disease 
is experienced by the individual and said to affect him, is an 
illusion created by ignorance [for that belongs to the body 
and not to intelligence]. 

231. The truth of the witnessing intelligence is an illusion 
created by ignorance. From illusory attribution, the three 
bodies, physical, subtle, and cause, are regarded as sem 
blance of the reflex intelligence, and real. 

232. During that illusion, a person affected with diseases 
of those bodies exclaims " I am unwell," " I am suffering from 
fever," etc. In point of truth, this experience is unreal : just 
as illusion attributes bondage to the Intelligence which is free 
and not subject to birth and death. 

233. As in the case of illness affecting a wife, or child, 
a person is affected with painful thoughts and considers him 
self to be so affected ; so out of ignorance, diseases of the 
three bodies are attributed to self, experienced in that con 
nection, and expressed in this manner : " I am ill." 

234. But subsequent to knowledge, when the nature of 
self has been ascertained, all divisions are at an end, and he 
no (longer connects the Witnessing Intelligence with those 
diseases, so that by discriminating the real nature of self, he 
ceases to express any regret for whatever happens to his body. 

235. For example. As in the illusion of snake in a rope, 
the sight of that false snake makes a person run away from it, 
and when with the discovery of the rope, that false snake is 
destroyed, he is ashamed at his cowardice ; similarly, subse 
quent to knowledge of self, his previous conception about his 
being a subject of disease is destroyed, and he is ashamed 
at his ignorance. 

236. Just as a person asks forgiveness of another, who has 
been offended by his false calumny, for pacifying him ; so in 


the mistaken attribution ef birth and death to self, a person is 
to pacify by taking protection of the Witnessing Intelligence. 

237- J ust as f r repeated destruction of sin, penances 
are performed over and over, so for the destruction of illusory 
attribution, an individual is always to meditate on Self as 
the Uniform Witnessing Intelligence. 

238. As a woman with cancer of the uterus feels ashamed 
when in the act of being co-habited, so a theosophist is 
ashamed at the mistaken notions, which he entertained, prior 
to gnosis of self. 

239. As a Brahman accidentally coming in contact with 
an unclean person, has recourse to usual penance and never 
afterwards found associating with him, so a theosophist sub 
sequent to knowledge, ceases to have a conceipt for his three 
bodies and connects them not with self : As " I am, etc." 

240. As a prince regent governing the kingdom of his 
father, is ber.t after the happiness of his subjects, with the view 
of being duly installed ; so with the view of being one with 
Brahma, a theosophist meditates on the Witnessing Intelli 
gence and its resemblance with self. 

241. "A knower of Brahma is himself a Brahma," Here 
is Sruti evidence, having for its purport destruction of misery 
and disregard for what a theosophist used to practice prior 
to knowledge. In other words, he should concentrate his 
desire to know Brahma and leave off everything else. 

242. As a person with the desire of acquiring the condition 
of Deva, seeks self-destruction in fire, or by falling from the 
summit of a mountain, or submerging in the Ganges, or at the 
confluence of the three sacred rivers at Allahabad ; so for the 
results abiding in the discovery of the Witnessing Intelligence 
being no other than self, a theosophist seeks the destruction 
of the reflex intelligence (Jiva) the more so, as his inclination 
for knowledge of Brahma may be intensified. 

243. But in the above instance, 30 long as the body lasts 
he continues to be a man, and with its destruction (when it is 


reduced into ashes) he becomes a Deva ; so till the consum 
mation of fructescent works, practically a person cannot do 
away with the reflex intelligence, but continues as Jiva [to be 
one with Brahma after the separation of the present body]. 

244. As the sight of snake in a rope, at once strikes a 
person with fright, which does not go away immediately with 
the discovery of his mistake, but subsides gradually, and as 
a repetition of the snake-illusion is apt to recur when he 
comes across a bit of string in the dark stretching in 
his path : 

245246. So with the rising of knowledge, his fructescent 
do not abruptly come to an end, but are gradually exhausted 
with consummation of their results, and during a subsequent 
period of enjoyment he is apt to conceive " I am a man". 

247. As in the instance of the "tenth person" the person 
counting the rest forgetting to count himself, invariably comes 
to stop at number nine, and the party thinking their tenth 
to have met with a watery grave, while in the act of crossing 
the river, give vent to their grief and strike their forehead, 
till pointed out by another, when discovering their mistake, 
their grief is replaced by happiness ; but that pain in the fore- 
head takes a little time to subside, and not at once : 

248. So a theosophist even after attaining to the condi 
tion of one delivered in life, has yet to exhaust his fructes 
cent and enjoy or suffer according to their merit or de-merit; 
and they cannot abruptly come to a close ; and his emancipa 
tion destroys the miseries of the fructescent. 

249. Now this condition of delivered in life is not an 
observance of religious ceremony or any particular practice,* 
but a mere resting on the Impartite Brahma, so that, if from a 
preponderance of the fructescent, there follows any illusion, 
to cause mental distraction, it should be guided by repeated 
discrimination of self, just as one having taken mercury, or 

* Like the fasting observed in the nth phase of moon. 


of arsenic cannot stand the pangs of hunger for 
a single day, but eats over and over. 

250. As in the aforesaid instance of the missing tenth, 
when in the height of their grief, the rest of the company beat 
their foreheads forcibly to cause pain, but perceive it not, till 
their mistake is pointed out and the missing tenth is visibly 
produced, when iu the midst of happiness, they feel pain 
which subsides after the application of medicines ; so a theo- 
sophist exhausts his fructescent by enjoying their results and 
subsequently attains to that Brahma, whose sole essence is 
joy, i.e., experiences the supreme felicity of emancipation. 

251. Whatever mention has been made in the present 
treatise from the first verse, for the destruction of misery and 
desire of release, that constitutes the 6th condition of an 
individual, a reflected shadow of the Uniform or Witnessing 
Intelligence; the seventh is that supreme felicity in the form 
of satiety called Nirvan, which is now being^determined. 

252. Satiety proceeding from the enjoyment of material 
prosperity, riches, position, rank, wife and children, etc., is 
called excessive, but this seventh form is supreme ; because 
with the attainment of the attainable [Brahma], one considers 
himself successful in achieving his end, and is supremely 

253. Prior to his knowledge, whatever avocation a person 
follows for the acquisition of felicity, or sacrificial offerings 
undertaken for the acquirement of the blissful abode of 
heaven, which is non-eternal, or whether practising the usual 
means* for the acquisition of knowledge to help his emanci 
pation, all these, were a part of his duty, it was proper for 

* The four means for attaining self-knovvledg-e are : 
(l). Discrimination of tnings eternal and transient. 
(2). Disregard of reaping any benefits here or hereafter. 
(3). Passivity, self-control, abstinence, endurance, etc. 
(4). Desrre df -deliverance [from future -re-births]. 


him, that they should be done ; but subsequent to knowledge, 
m the absence of a desire for enjoying any results relating to 
earth-life, and for an experience of the felicity of Brahma, 
all that he had done cease to produce any more fruits to a 
theosophist: they are dead and abortive so to speak, and as 
he has nothing proper for him to do, he is therefore said to 
be successful in having done \vhat was proper. [Just as a 
candidate for examination is said to be successful when he has 
answered the questions set and satisfied his examiners, so that 
nothing remains for him to do, so far as the examination is 
concerned; so ajheosophist is said to be successful when he 
has a visible cognition of Brahma and he has nothing proper 
for him to do, or be engaged in. Because the usual means, 
devotional exercises, etc., have brought forth their results in 
paving the way to knowledge, which has produced emancipa 
tion in turn, and that is the goal.] 

254. In this manner, having done what was proper for him 
to do, and finding nothing left that was proper to be done, he 
recollects it and is supremely satisfied (with his success). 

255. Miserable persons steeped in ignorance of Self-know 
ledge are absorbed in their desire for a wife, children and mate 
rial prosperity : let them continue so. [But as] "I am full of 
supreme bliss" what desire can I possibly have to continue 
attached to earth-life ? 

256. Let them who desire the blissful abode of heaven 
practise sacrificial offerings, but " I am a knower of self" what 
occasion have I for practising any more action ? 

257. Let those who are qualified for studying the Shastras 
read them, or let them study the Vedas : my knowledge of self 
is ripe, hence "1 am actionless" and not qualified for any thing 

258. Really I do not sleep, nor go out for begging, neither 
do I bathe, nor conform to any previous habits ; and if any 
one were to attribute them to me, that cannot cause any harm 
lo my self. 


259. As a heap of Abrus precatorius appears from distance 
to be fire, and in spite of that appearance it has no burning 
property, so the attribution of others about my being a worldly 
man, will not make my-self so. 

260. Let an enquirer of self-knowledge who has not suc 
ceeded in the cognition of his oneness with the Impartite 
Brahma, continue to be engaged in the usual means for its 
acquisition ; "I am a knower of the Supreme Brahma," there 
fore have no more a necessity for them. Let them that are 
affected with doubts practise * consideration, " I am free from 
doubt ;" and have therefore no occasion for it. 

261. Let him who has antagonistic ideas concerning the 
Supreme Brahma, have recourse to contemplation, but " I am 
free from conflicting ideas." Why then am I to undertake its 

262. Even in spite of conflicting ideas from a force erf 
confirmed habit and as a result of fructescent works, a theo- 
sophist is apt to exlaim " I am a man." [That is,, not 

263. But with the exhaustion of the fructescent, by enjoy 
ing their results, the above practice ceases : otherwise a thou 
sand contemplations over and over, are quite powerless to 
destroy it so long as the fructescent continue. 

264. If the practical use of the above expression " I am. 
a man" appears conflicting to knowledge and for seeking its 
destruction you think it desirable to be engaged in contempla 
tion, that may ;be necessary for you; but seeing that practice 
to be opposed to knowledge why "am 1" to contemplate ? 

265. For I am free from mental distraction, and there 
fore there is no occasion for me to have recourse to profound 
meditation. Both distraction and profound meditation are the 
attributes of an unrestrained and changeable [fickle] mind. 

266. I am not an agent, neither a beggar, nor a student 
of the sacred scriptures; I am no doer of sacrifice, or devo 
tional exercise, from the force of the fructescent; no practice, 


either popular or religious, or anything else, can cause me 

267. Or, if after having done all that was proper to be 
done, for the sake of securing popular favor I follow the 
practice enjoined in the Shastras, even that does not cause 
me any harm. 

268. Whether my body is engaged in devotion and wor 
ship, bathing, and cleanliness, or begging for food, and my 
words, in recanting the mystic Om, or hearing the Upa- 
nishads , 

269. Whether my intellect be engaged in contemplating 
Vishnu, or absorbed in the felicity of Brahma, " I am the eter 
nal, pure, Witnessing Intelligence," and have neither any incli 
nation for works, nor create it in any. 

270. For this difference between a theosophist and doer 
of works, there is hardly any ground of contention or dispute 
between them, just as two seas situated apart cannot mix 
their waters or form a junction. 

271. Because a doer of works and \vorshiphasforhis 
pursuit body, speech and intellect, which a theosophist has 
not, (his is the Witnessing Intelligence). Thus for a differ 
ence of subjects, there is no common ground of contention. 
[In other words, not-self, and self are situated quite apart from 
one another, not-self is the subject of a doer of works, and 
self that of a theosophist, hence for a difference of pursuit, 
of not-self by the former and self by the latter, there is no 
apprehension of any quarrel between them.] 

272. In spite of this difference, if they would quarrel, 
from an ignorance of each other, that can only create mirth to 
a person of intellect, just as to deaf persons quarrelling 
from an incapacity of hearing what one says to the other, 
excites laughter. 

273. A doer of works and worship has no cognition of 
the Witnessing Intelligence, but a theosophist knows it to be 


Brahma, and how can that knowledge of the latter be injurious 
to the former ? 

274. A theosophist has discovered self, and he mistakes 
him not with the physical body and the rest, which are non- 
eternal, therefore they engage not his attention; but for a doer 
of works to be engaged quite in the contrary direction, cannot 
be harmful to the former. 

275. If it be contended, for a theosophist to be engaged 
in works and worship is not proper, but where is the propriety 
of their cessation ? And if cessation of works, be the extra 
ordinary cause of knowledge, in that case, there can be no in 
clination for the acquisition of Self-knowledge. 

276. If it be said, subsequent to knowledge, there is no 
necessity for inclination to cause it, the inference naturally will 
be : What is the necessity for cessation of works to bring forth 
knowledge, inasmuch as they cannot cause any obstruction to, 
or destroy it ? 

277. Neither ignorance, nor conceit, (egoism) can cause 
any obstruction to it, for they have been destroyed in the first 
stage of knowledge, by discrimination of self. 

278. Therefore ignorance, already destroyed; can create no 
obstruction to, or cause destruction of knowledge. When a live 
rat flies at the sight or approach of a cat, how can a dead rat 
injure him. 

279. When a person stands uninjured after receiving the 
thrust of Pashupat weapon, how will a lighter one without steel 
points cause his destruction ? 

280. When from performance of works and worship in an 
infinite variety of ways, a person has come out victorious in his 
fight with the fructescent works, and landed in full knowledge 
of self, he can never be affected in a manner so as to have it 

281. Though destruction of ignorance and its product, 
caused by knowledge, allow that ignorance to continue like a 


dead body, yet such appearance is not injurious to him, on the 
other hand, it proclaims his glory. 

282. He who does not alicMiate himself from this all-power 
ful knowledge in any way, has nothing to fear either from 
inclination or its reverse they cause him no injury. 

283. It is always proper for the ignorant to be engaged 
in works and worship, for they help the attainment of 
heaven : or by rendering the internal organ faultless, pave the 
way to the acquisition of knowledge, whereby to be emanci 

284. When a theosophist lives in the company of such an 
ignorant person, no harm can befall him, if he be engaged in 
similar works at his intercession. 

285. But in the company of the wise, he should discard 
all works, increase his stock of knowledge by attributing de 
fects to them. 

286. And for a theosophist to be engaged in works, in the 
company of the ignorant, in the manner aforesaid, implies no 

287. Just as a father when thrown to the ground by his 
child, or scolded and .nade bad use of, feels neither pain nor is 
angry with him, but caresses all the same ; 

288. So a theosophist either caluminated, or praised by the 
ignorant, returns it not, but tries to create knowledge in them. 
And thus lie uses them. 

289. Now the result of this practice of a theosophist 
among the ignorant is being declared. That which helps the 
cognition of self in the ignorant, a theosophist should do ; he 
has nothing else proper for him. 

290. And satisfied with the accomplishment of what was 
proper for him to do, he mentally reflects in the following 

291. I have a tangible perception of the eternal Self, there 
fore I am blessed. The supreme felicity of Brahma is plainly 
manifested to me, therefore I am blessed. 


292. The miseries of earth-life touch me not, therefore i 
am blessed. The darkness of ignorance has left me, therefore 
I am blessed. 

293. I have nothing proper left to be done, therefore I am 
blessed. My desires have all been now accomplished, hence I 
am blessed. 

94. Verily I am blessed, I am blessed, my satisfaction isf 
unrivalled ; I am blessed, and blessed and blessed, and twice 
more blessed. 

295. My merit is producing fruit " I am supreme good," 
my merit is extremely wonderful, and for that, " I am wonder 
ful too." 

296. How very wonderful are the Sacred Writings, Guru 1 
and knowledge ; and how incomparably exquisite is the feli 
city which I am now master of. 

297. Now the result of studying this treatise is set forth : 
He who studies it always, is immersed in the felicity of Brahma 1 
and experiences supreme felicity always. 

SECTION viti. 

On the Discovery of the Uniform Intelligence . 

WITHOUT clearing the signification of That and Thou of the 
transcendental phrase "That art Thou," there can be no know 
ledge of oneness of individual self and the Parabrahma as a 
means of emancipation, therefore in the present treatise the 
literal and indicated signification of Thou is to be first ascer 
tained. Just as the ordinary light of sun discovers a wall and 
other objects, but by concentrating that light on a glass and 
reflecting it on them, they are emblazoned and strikingly illu 
minated, so is the Uniform Intelligence vivifying or illuminat 
ing our bodies, intensely manifested by the individual Intelli 
gence centred in the Intellect or Spiritual Soul {Boodhi) and 
gains doubly in brilliancy. 

2. As in the sun s light reflected through a lens on a wall, 
here and there a stray ray of light retains its ordinary lumino 
sity and absence of that junction of the lens with sun-light 
makes no difference in it : 

3. So the function of intellect, endowed with the reflected 
shadow of Intelligence, helping the cognition of external ob 
jects by forming a junction with them [in waking], or its want 
[in profound^slumber], is discovered by the Uuiform Intelli 
gence. Know it to be distinct from the reflex intelligence with 
the function of intellect. 

4. That reflection of intelligence seated in intellect, as* 
suines the shape of an external object which it seeks to cog 
nise, and discovers it so : "This is a jar." But knowledge 
of its properties, etc., is brought about by the Uniform Intelli 
gence as " I know a jar," 

5. Prior to the modification of intellect in the shape of a 
jar, " I knew net a jr" arises from the Brahmaic Intelligence 


[uniform] ; and subsequent to its perception in the modified 
intellect, a person discovers it and says, "I know a jar." This 
is the difference between the intelligences, Individual and Brah- 
maic, [uniform]. 

6. As in a steel knife, its sharp edge is confined to one 
side, so the modification or function of intellect resides in one 
part or province of reflex intelligence and ignorance the two 
pervading a jar, are said to make it known or otherwise. 

7. Like an unknown jar discovered by the Uniform (Brah- 
maic) Intelligence, known jar is also discovered by it. Why ? 
Because reflex intelligence simply creates a knowledge of jar,* 
and that known jar is discovered by Brahmaic Intelligence. 

8. Intellect, without the reflex intelligence, can produce 
no cognition of an object, consequently, in the cognition of 
jar as a lump of clay, there can be no difference apprehended 
between the reflex intelligsnce and modification of intellect of 

9. As without knowing it, on one can say, that he knows 
a jar, so without reflex intelligence, simple pervasion of a jar 
by intellect cannot be admitted to cause it to be known. 

10. From what has been said, it would appear mental 

* Says The Vedantasara : 

In the cognition of "This is a jar" the mental function assumes 
the shape of, or pervades the unknown jar and dispels the igno 
rance which rests there. By its reflected intelligence, it then dis 
covers or renders it visible. As is mentioned in the Shastras, " the 
mental perception and its indwelling Intelligence both occupy the 
jar, the first dispels the ignorance about it, the second brings it 
out to view, (i. e., renders it visible." As the light of a lamp 
taking possession of such articles as a jar, a cloth, etc., which 
occupy a dark corner, dispels the surrounding darkness and 
bring them out to view by its own brilliance, so the mental func 
tion after disp elling the ignorance which occupies an unknown jar, 
brings it out or renders it cognizable to the senses by its indwel 
ling reflex intelligence. K*V DHOLE S Vedantasara, pp. 43-44. 
2 7 


function (Intellect) with reflex intelligence assuming the modi 
fication of an object which they prevade are the source of its 
cognition ; and that knowledge is not to be expected as capa 
ble of being brought about by the Uniform Intelligence, since 
it was existing piior to its being known [or discovered by the 
intellect with reflex intelligence]. 

11. This view is not opposed to what SURESWAR ACHARYA 
(Bartikara) holds, as maintained by the supporters of the dis 
criminating view of intelligence known by the name of Ava- 
fheda vadi, Cognition of external objects, a jar etc., is caused 
by intelligence, therefore the cause of that knowledge is intelli 
gence, for which, the result is the subject to be known or de 
monstrated : and this intelligence is the subject that is to be 
known from Vedantic utterances, which are its proofs. 

12. Therefore SURESWAR wants to establish the reflex in 
telligence, which resembles the Uniform or Brahma, to be a 
result of proof, and not the latter ; for in the Upadesha Saha- 
shri of SANKARACHARYA (his preceptor) occurs the distinction 
between the two intelligences. 

13. Since then, the distinction between the Uniform and 
Reflex Intelligences is an admitted fact, mental function, arising 
in the shape of Reflex Intelligence pervading a jar is the cause 
of its cognition, and the resulting knowledge, like ignorance, is- 
fit for being discovered by the Uniform Intelligence. In other 
words, cognition or knowledge is discovered by Brahma [Uni 
form Intelligence] like an unknown jar, inasmuch as the modi 
fication of intellect, reflection of intelligence and external ob 
jects, jar etc., all are discovered by Brahma, while for its being 
a single subject, a jar is discovered by the reflex. 

14. Thus then, mental function issuing through the sen 
sory organs, reflex intelligence, and jar, all three, are manifes 
ted by the Brahmaic or Uniform Intelligence, and for the reflex 
being seated in the jar only in the form of result, which it per 
vades for cognizing it, that jar is discovered by the reflex 


15. Therefore, the knowledge of a known jar is discovered 
by both the Reflex and Uniform Intelligences, and this is cal 
led by a Naiyayika (Anubyabsaya) knowledge of knowledge. 

16. From the reflex intelligence proceeds particular know 
ledge, as "This is ajar;" while the Uniform creates an ordinary 
acquaintance with it, as a "known jar." 

17. Just as in the cognition of external objects, both the 
Reflex and Uniform Intelligences are ascertained, so are they 
to be considered in reference to the physical body. 

18. But it may be alleged in reference to external objects, 
the mental function pervades them, and as inside the body 
there is no subject to be pervaded by the modification of intel 
lect, consequently there is no necessity for admitting reflex 
intelligence. Therefore it is said, Egoism is present and the 
pervasion of reflex intelligence is required to discover it. Just 
as in a ball of red hot iron, fire pervades it, and is present, inti 
mately combined with the iron, so does reflex intelligence per 
vade Egoism, passions and desires, by mixing with them. 

19. And as that ball of iron manifests itself and is incap 
able of discovering any other object, so do the modifications of 
Egoism, passions, etc., with the reflex intelligence discover 

20. These aforesaid modifications, separated by the inter 
vals of waking and dreaming, are apt to arise, as they disap 
pear during profound slumber, trance, fainting and profound 

21. That unchangeable Intelligence which discovers the 
junction or union of those modifications and their want, is the 
Uniform Brahmaic Intelligence. 

22. As in the cognition of an external object, a jar, the 
reflex discovers only, "This is a jar," and the knowledge of 
that jar is discovered by Brahmaic Intelligence, we have there 
fore both the intelligences ; so in regard to the internal modi 
fications, Egoism, etc., we have a similar play of both intelli 
gences. And that double display of intelligence in junction 


with those modifications make them more strongly manifested 
than external objects. 

23. Unlike external objects which are capable of being 
ascertained either known or unknown, internal objects of 
mental perception are not ; because that perception can 
not take hold of or cover itself, and ignorance is destroyed 
by it. 

24. If it be asked, so far as intelligence goes, both the 
reflex and uniform are identical, why then is the former called 
changeable and the latter, uniform or unchangeable ? Because 
that double intelligence is liable to birth and death, therefore 
it is Jiva, while the uniform distinct from it is unchangeable 
and eternal, the Supreme Brahma. 

25. Older professors have, in various places of their 
writings, mentioned the Uniform Intelligence as the witness of 
mental perception and its modifications. 

26. As in the reflection of face in a mirror, all the three 
(face, its reflection and mirror) are visibly perceptible, so by 
the help of the sacred writings and their arguments are to be 
known, Self (Uniform Intelligence) his reflection (reflected 
shadow of Intelligence) and its site or receptacle (the internal 
organ). In the Upadesha Sahashri, Uniform Intelligence is 
described as distinct from the reflex in the following wise. "It 
is the witness of the mind and intellect." And in the Sruti 
" Like the associate of the internal organ the reflex is only a 
reflected shadow" [of Intelligence i.e., self]. 

27. If it be alleged, since the Uniform Intelligence is 
everywhere equally present, let that Intelligence seated in the 
intellect, be the subject of transmigration (like the ether in a 
jar) and there will be no necessity for imagining the reflex 
intelligence to be Jiva? 

28. The reply is ; That limiting of the Uniform Intelli 
gence would not necessarily convert it into a Jiva, just as the 
uniform present in a jar and wall and limited by them, or dis 
criminated in that way, are no lunger a Jiva. 


29. If it be said, from want of luminosity, the Uniform 
Intelligence present in a jar or wall, and bounded by them, 
cannot convert them into Jiva, but for the luminosity of intel 
lect, the uniform intelligence seated in and bounded by it, is 
Jiva : the answer is, there is no occasion for introducing 
luminosity or its reverse, when you seek to discriminate the 
Uniform Intelligence by setting a limit to it : 

30. Just as the use of a measure made either of brass or 
a lighter substance, can bring no profit to the seller in dealing 
out a specified quantity of grains to a purchaser. 

31. If you reply, the metallic measure has a particular 
action, inasmuch as it is capable of reflecting an image, 
though as a measure it has no difference with one made of 
wood, then, What prevents a similar reflection of intelligence 
in Intellect ? 

32. And though the manifestibility or luminosity of that 
reflection of intelligence [in intellect] is very slight, and dis 
tinct from the Uniform Intelligence which is luminous, light- 
like, yet it is endowed with powers of discovery. And the 
same cause that deprives a shadow of the signs of the light 
whose shadow it is, and makes it manifested, produces the 
reflection of that light.* 

* In the work Vibarana, Jiva is defined as a reflection and 
Iswara light [subject of reflection]. According to the doctrine of 
VIDYARANYA SwAMi, Iswara is the reflection of Intelligence in 
Maya abounding in pure goodness, and Jiva, a reflection of in 
telligence in Avidya abounding in pure goodness, which is a 
proximate cause of the internal organ. Though in the Pancha- 
dasi, VIDYARANYA SWAMI mentions Jiva to be a reflection in the 
internal organ, and as that internal organ is not present in the 
profound slumbering condition, consequently then, there should 
be no Jiva also ; but as Prajna, almost ignorant a form of 
Jiva continues in dreamless profound slumber, therefore what the 
SWAMI purports to mean is, the particle of ignorance modified 
or changed into the form of internal organ, and intelligence re- 


33. [To be more explicit]. Inasmuch as the Reflex is as 
sociated and changeable, while the light of Uniform intelli 
gence is unassociated and unchangeable, therefore the former 

fleeted therein is called Jiva, and that ignorance is never wanting 
in profound slumber, consequently Prajna also is not wanting 
then. Moreover, reflection of intelligence alone does not consti 
tute either a Jiva or Iswara, but intelligence abiding in Maya, 
and the reflex intelligence with Maya, constitute Iswara; and 
intelligence abiding in ignorance, and the reflex intelligence with 
the particle of ignorance, constitute Jiva. In the associate of 
Iswara, there is pure goodness, for which he is omnipotent, omni 
scient, etc. ; while the associate of Jiva is composed of impure 
goodness, hence he is parviscient, parvipotent and the rest. This 
is said by the supporters of the Reflex Theory. 

The associates of Jiva and Iswara are identical according to 
the view of the author of Vtbarana, who connects them with Igno 
rance. In such a consideration, both Iswara and Jiva must be 
parviscient. But it is not so ; because it is the nature of a thing 
in which there is a reflection, to impart its defects to the reflection, 
and not to the image : as for instance, when a face is reflected in 
a mirror (its associate) the defects belonging to the mirror will pre 
vent a faithful reproduction of the face itself. Hence the defects, 
though present in the mirror, are not cognized or rendered visible 
till the face is reflected in a mirror, for which it is said, reflection 
determines defects. Similarly in the reflection of the Jiva, in ihe 
mirror of ignorance, are produced the defects caused by it, such 
as parviscience, etc., while Iswara (in the form of image of pure 
Intelligence) who is the visage, has none of them, for which He 
is omniscient. This is the cause of His omnipotence, omniscience 
etc., and the parvipotence aud parviscience of a being. Now 
between the respective doctrines set up by these supporters of 
reflection and reflected image, the difference is this A reflection 
is false, but a reflected image is true, and not false. For, the 
expounders of reflected image conclude as a natural inference that 
the reflected image of the face in a mirror, is not a shadow of that 
face, inasmuch as a shadow is situated in the same site, where its 
original is placed ; but in the case of a face reflected in a m irror, it 


is said to be wanting in the indications of the latter, and hence 
distinct; but its luminosity is manifested like, that of the 

34. As an earthen jar is non-different in its composition 
from earth, so is reflex intelligence non-different from (Boodhi) 
Intellect, for an identity of their condition. But it may be 

is always placed in front, or exactly opposite to the original, hence 
a reflected image is not a shadow in a looking-glass. But for 
making a subject of the mirror, the function of the internal organ, 
projected by the organ of sight, makes that mirror its subject, at 
the same time, it ceases or retreats from that mirror, and makes 
the face, situated on the neck, its subject. As quick playing 
(Bunite] makes the wheel of a fire-brand perceived, while ac 
tually it has no wheel, so the velocity of mental function for 
making a subject of the mirror and face, produces the perception 
of that face in the glass as situated in it ; while actually it is 
placed on the region of the neck, and not in the glass, and is not 
a shadow : and, by the velocity of the mental function, the know 
ledge of a face in a glass, is reflection. In this manner, from the 
connection of the associated mirror, the face placed on the region- 
of the neck appears both as a visage and its reflection. More 
over, on due reflection, it is to be found, there is no reflection. 
Similarly by the close connection of the associate formed by 
Ignorance, the site of visage in the unassociated Intelligence is 
known Isvvara, and its reflection, Jiva. And there are no 
separate conditions of Iswara and Ji-va. 

The perception of a Jiva in Intelligence, from Ignorance is 
called its reflection in Ignorance ; so that, both the considerations 
of visage and its reflection are unreal, while actually they are 
true ; for the site of their actuality is the face and its reflection in- 
a mirror; and in the subject of the illustration Intelligence- 
that face and intelligence are true. According to this view, as a 
reflection proceeds from the original, it is consequently true ; and 
a reflected shadow, for its being the shadow, is untrue. This then- 
is the difference between the expressions reflection and refletcted 
shadow. DHOLE S Edition of Vicharsagar, pp. 328-330. 


apprehended : in that case, distinction of intellect from the 
physical body, will be done away with ; therefore to settle the 
question, it is said, what is maintained by a theosophist is very 
little to the purpose, because it is easy to admit intellect as not 
an additional entity distinct from the body. 

35. If it be alleged, subsequent to death, when the physi 
cal body is absent, existence of intellect is established from the 
testimony of the Sru/i; then as in the Prabesha Sru/t, reflex 
is described to be distinct from Intellect, it is but proper to 
regard it in that way. 

36. If you say, it is possible for the associate of Intellect 
to enter a body : the reply is, self distinct from Intellect is said 
to enter according to the authority of the Aiterya Upanishad: 
" Self distinct from Intellect with a desire of entering, enters 
the body." 

37. " This body with its insentient sensory organs cannot 
exist without the intelligence of Self," having considered in 
this manner, he enters the body through the cavity of Brahma 
situated on the crown of the head, corresponding to the 
anterior fontanele, and experiences waking, dreaming and 
profound slumber. 

38. If it be contended, How can the unassociated Supreme 
Self enter a body ? It may as well be said in reply, in that 
case it is impossible to attribute to him the instrumentality of 
creation. Thus then, both his entrance and instrumentaiity or 
causation equally are due to Maya, and with the destruction 
of that Illusion, they too are equally destroyed, therefore the 
cause of their destruction is alike. 

39. YAJNAVALKYA in his discourse on Self-knowledge with 
his wife Maitreyi, cites passages from the Srutilv explain the 
destruction of associate as follows: "The Supreme Intelli 
gence Self, taking his birth with the physical body, organs 
sensory and active, etc., dies with the destruction of the 
body, and subsequent to its demise no knowledge abides in 

it." In other words, though distinct from the body and the 


rest, which are material, self for keeping company with them, 
appears to be destroyed when the associates succumb to 

40. " The Supreme Self is eternal, and unassociated, his 
associates are destroyed only," [and not he]. In this manner, 
Sruti explains the Uniform Intelligence (Self) devoid of 
associate, to be distinct from the associated reflex intelligence. 
<( He is indestructible." And "unconnected with the body and 
the rest." 

41. " When leaving the physical body, Jiva does not die ; 
because he is without birth and death, the body alone dies." 
In this passage, the Sruti does not seek to expound that with 
death, he is emancipated and freed, but subjected to metempsy 

42. If then the associated Jiva is subjected to destruction, 
how can he have any identity of relation with, "I who am the 
Supreme Brahma and indestructible ?" Therefore it is said, 
this knowledge is not of identity; it is community of reference 
and that is capable of existing even in the presence of obsta 
cle or antagonism.* 

* Though the spiritual soul or intelligence (Boodhi) with the 
reflex is the seat of the perception I am Brahma, and not the 
Uniform, yet such reflex knows that the Uniform Intelligence 
and its principle of individuality are the Atma, indicated by the 
first personal pronoun I, which also is the same as Aham. 
Now Aham 1 establishes the Uniform intelligence as always non- 
different from Brahma, as the space covered by jar is always one 
with the infinite space from which it cannot be in any way demar 
cated. Hence the Vedantin describes this mutual relationship 
of the Uniform with Brahma as Mukshya Samanadhikarana 1 a 
main predicament or inference in which several things are in 

When a thing is always non-different from another thing, 
their association is called a Mukshya Samanadhikarana. As for 
instancee the space engrossed by a jar is always non-different 


43. As from mistake or illusion when the stump of a tree 
is taken for a man, not to know it as a stump does not affect 
the other knowledge that it is a man ; so when the perception 
of egoism "I am an agent, and instrument" is destroyed by the 
knowledge "I am the Supreme Brahma," the objective world is 

44. SURESWAR ACHARYA has in this manner pointed out in 
his work Niskartnya Siddhi* the antagonism of community of 

from the infinite space which is ever present along with it, there 
fore the jar-space is the infinite space and as such, the first has 
in relation to the last, the condition of a predicament in which 
it is included with it. In the same manner, the Uniform Intelli 
gence has in connection with Brahma a similar main inclusive 
predicament, because they are always non-different from one 

Or, as in a person mistaking the stump of a tree for man, after 
the tree is known, the form of man disappears and the tree is 
rendered apparent. Here the person has a community of refer 
ence to the tree, of the second kind ; similarly by the disappear 
ance of the reflected Intelligence, it becomes one with Universal 
Intelligence, which is one with Brahma, hence its reference to 
T is the same with Brahma, and not distinct from it. Such a 
community of reference the reflex intelligence has with Brahma 
by merging or disappearing into it. 

* SURESWARA, the reputed disciple "of SANKARACHARYA, is the 
author of Niskarmya Siddhi. He is opposed to the doctrine of a 
theosophist s acting with impunity. For him there is nothing 
proper to do ; to this end says the Vicharsagar :- "If after hearing 
the utterances of Vedanta, any one has an inclination still left in 
him as to what is proper, he has not learnt the first principle, or 
primitive truth. For this reason, the constant removal of the use 
less, and which answers no purpose, and acquirement of felicity, 
that is constantly got as a result of hearing the Vedanta, is men 
tioned by the Deva Guru in Ni&armya Siddhi. Vicharsagar, 
DHOLE S Edition, pp. 120-121. 


reference : for this reason, community of reference is destroyed 
in the expression "I am Brahma." 

45. As in "All this is indeed Brahma" the Supreme 
Brahma has a community of reference with "all this" the 
objective world so in "I am Brahma" there is possible for the 
same reference with Jiva. 

46. But objection may be taken to it, for in his work 
Vivarana, PRAKASHATMACHARAN SWAMI, speaks of the oppo 
sition of community of reference ( Vadh Samanadhikarana). 
To explain this, it is said :- With a desire of declaring self to 
be identical with Uniform Intelligence, the author of Vivarana 
ascertains the incompatibility of community of reference and 
seeks to do away with it.* 

47. Both in the Vivarana and other works, professors 
have sought to establish the indication of Thou in the 
Uniform Intelligence the Supreme Brahma, and having 
ascertained the incompatible community of reference ( Vadh 
Samanadhikarana) have spoken of the main inclusive predica 
ment referring to the same subject.f 

48. Intelligence abiding in, and mistaken for, Jiva who is 
the reflected shadow of Intelligence combined in the gross and 
subtle body, is in the Vedanta declared to be the Uniform. 

49. And Brahma rs the substrate of Intelligence perva 
ding everywhere, and completely in phenomena fabricated out 
of illusion. 

* Vadha Samanadhikarana means that condition of mutual 
relationship, when a thing establishes its non-difference with its 
companion by lapsing into it. Here the thing is a Vadha sarna* 
nadhikarana to its companion. As for instance, the reflection of a 
face merges into the face (when the mirror is withdrawn) hence 
they are non-distinct; the reflection is the face itself and not some 
thing different, and this mutual relationship of the reflection with 
the face is called (Vadha Samanadhikarana ) community of re 
ference by merging. Vicharsagar, DHOLE S Edition p, 121, 

| Vide note pp, 212213. 


50. Since therefore illusion attributes the unreal worfcf, 
and mistakes it for the indestructible and unchangeable Intel 
ligence, the substrate of all, it is not at all surprising that Jiva f 
who is the reflected shadow of Intelligence should be similarly 
attributed, as there, Jiva is a part of the material world. 

51. For a difference in associate, the material world and 
Jiva included in it, That and Thou appear to be distinct; 
virtually they refer to one intelligence. 

52. That reflex Intelligence (Jiva) assumes the attributes 
of the spiritual soul, intellect or Boodhi, viz., as an agent or 
instrument and demonstrator, and the illumination of self ; for 
which, it is said to be an illusion [just as in nacre no silver is 
present, but illusion attributes or super-imposes on it. Here 
we have two* conditions "This nacre" is the seat or abiding 
place of silver, and the other, attribution or superimposition of 
illusion : so in the superimposition of reflex on the Uniform 
Intelligence there ought to be the two conditions of abiding 
and superimposition ; and in the absence of discerning their 
attributes how can illusion be established in them ? This is 
what a dissenter objects to. Therefore, it is said, the reflex is 
only an illusion; for agency and instrumentality are properties 
of the Intellect, and illumination belongs to Self, who is the 
Uniform Intelligence. Barring them, what remains of Jiva ? 

53. And the cause of that mistake or illusion is ignorance. 
What is Intellect ? What is this reflex intelligence or Jiva? 
What is Self ? And what is this material world ? From want 
of discriminating them, is engendered error, which error or 
illusion is fit to be destroyed, for it is nothing less than the 
world we live in. 

54. But it may be asked how is illusion to be destroyed ? 
By proper discrimination when a person has come to know the 
nature of the several entities, intellect, reflex and Uniform 
Intelligences, etc., he is a real knower of Self and freed. So 
says the Vedanta. 


55. Thus then, we find discrimination and its want are 
the cause of emancipation and consecutive re-births, and the 
Naiyayika s jeering taunts to his adversary about bondage and 
emancipation being uncertain, according to a non-dualist 3 
standpoint, is easily refuted by the arguments employed in 
Rhandan, by its author SRIHARSA. 

56. Having ascertained the nature of Uniform Intelligence 
from Sruti texts and arguments based on analogy and reason, 
the testimony of the Puranas is now being declared. "That 
Uniform Intelligence is witness of the modification of intellect, 
and of its prior condition, when it has not arisen ; of desire of 
enquiring and its prior condition of ignorance, when a person 
says " I am Ignorant ;" and for its being so, it is said to be 
.full of felicity. 

57. For its being the resting place [substrate] of the unreal 
objective world, it is truth ; for its being the discoverer of all- 
insentient objects, it is Intelligence, as the site of affection 
always, blissfulness ; and as the illuminator of all objects 
having connection with them, it is perfect.* 

* Various are the objections raised against what has been said 
of the felicity, intelligence, etc., of the Uniform Intelligence or self. 
Thus felicity is disputed : a difference in the modification of 
intellect creates a difference in it, because it is the witness of modi 
fication, and where no such difference affects it, it is no naore a wit 
ness of those modifications. Then again, it is contended how can 
the site of an unreal substance be real ? As they are naturally 
opposed to each other. In the snake-illusion, the site of that 
snake is a real rope : there can be no snake-illusion without seeing 
a rope, a bit of straw, etc., in the dark, on which is super-imposed 
the form of snake through ignorance : we have therefore a trite 
instance which sets at rest the second contention. Similarly as rt 
is said to be a discoverer of insentient objects only, it can lay no 
claim to intelligence, and if it is no intelligence, it can be no dis 
coverer, but is virtually insentient like a jar, But without intelli 
gence, there can follow no discovery ; in short like rabbit s horns 


58. In this rmnner, Uniform Intelligence is described in 
the Siva Purana, to be neither a Jiva nor Iswara, but self-illu 
minated Intelligence, full of blissfnlness. 

59* How ? Because both Jiva and Iswara are declared 
in the Sruti to be "formed of Maya and reflex intelligence." 
It maybe apprehended, if they are thus material, there will 
be no distinction between them, and the insentient physical 
body, etc. To clear this, it is said, just as there is distinction 
between a glass and earthen jar, though equally material, for 
the one is transparent, which the other is not, so are Jiva and 
Iswara distinct from the physical body and the rest. 

60. Just as body and mind (modified products of food) 
are different from one another, inasmuch as the former is in 
sentient which the latter is not ; so Iswara and Jiva though 
material, are far more sentient than other objects of the 

61. Though Jiva and Iswara are thus material, yet for 
manifesting intelligence, it is possible to regard them as 
intelligence itself, and this is plausible enough, since there is 
nothing impossible for Maya to fabricate. 

62. Since even in our slumber, consciousness present in 
dreams creates Jiva and Iswara: what objection can there be 
for the Primordial Cosmic Matter to contrive intelligence in 
Jiva and Iswara? 

63. Though equally material with Jiva, yet Iswara is not 
parviscient like him, for the same Maya shows him to be om- 

which exist not, the phenomenal would have been similarly condi 
tioned, and remained undiscovered. Without a connection of in 
telligence, insentient objects can never be known ; to say, they are 
discovered of themselves, and intelligence plays no part is clearly 
absurd. What is subject of another s affection cannot be bliss- 
fulness itself. And for its being universally related, it can 
be no more an universal illuminator, neither the one nor the 


tttsclent. Since it is capable of fabricating Iswara, what pos 
sible objection can there be for fabricating his omniscience ? 

64. It is improper to regard the Uniform Intelligence In 
the same light with Jiva and Iswara, and to say, it is unreal, and 
an illusion : for testimony to that effect is wanting. 

65. On the other hand, its Reality is explained in all Vt- 
dantic treatises, and it has no similarity either with the 
elements or any other substance, for which it can be said to 
be material. 

66. Hitherto for ascertaining the nature of Iswara and 
Uniform Intelligence their unreality and reality testimony 
of the Sniti has been made use of only, and if in the absence 
of the uaual arguments to help that, any one be inclined to 
raise objections, it is therefore declared : our purpose is only 
to disclose the real meaning of Sruti texts and not to invite 
discussion so that a Naiyayika, fond of dispute, should have 
any cause of misapprehension. 

67. Following the method adopted here, one should 
abstain from ill-matched arguments and disputes and depend 
entirely on what the Sfuti says. And there we find it stated 
"Maya creates Jiva and Iswara." 

68. Beginning with creation till his entry in all objects is 
the work of Iswara, and that of Jiva ranges between the condi 
tions of waking and emancipation. 

69. From the Sruti we gather : "The Uniform Intelli 
gence is without decline and growth, always uniform." And 
it is proper to discriminate it, in that manner. 

70. Who is without birth and death, and not subjected 
to re-birth, can have no concern for practising the means of 
emancipation from metempsychosis ; who is neither desirous 
of such release, nor free is the Real, Indestructible, Uniform 

71. As it is unspeakable and unthinkable, therefore the 
i, for explaining and ascertaining its nature, has described 


it by reference to Jiva and Iswara and the objective world, 
whose substrate it is. 

72. There can be no objection in what manner soever a 
person begets an inclination to know self, and for a theoso- 
phist it is always proper so to do. 

73- Because from failing to comprehend the drift of Sruti 
utterences, dull and ignorant persons are entranced, and made 
to wander in illusion ; while a person of discrimination with 
his knowledge of self is immersed in his supreme felicity : 

74. And he knows it for certain, that the cloud of illusion 
is constantly raining in the form of this material expanse, and 
the Uniform Intelligence is like ether, quite unconnected with 
it, and can suffer no injury from that mistake, or derive any 
profit, [for he is unassociated and blissful]. 

75. He who studies the present treatise and ascertains its 
drift, gets an insight of knowledge of Self and experiences 
supreme felicity by his unbroken presence in the luminosity of 
that Uniform Intelligence. Such is its result. 


On the Light of Meditation. 

IN beginning the present treatise, the emancipation which 
proceeds from the worship of Brahma (like that accruing from 
knowledge of Supreme Brahma) is being pointed out. Art 
illusion is to know a thing different from what it is, and to 
mistake it for something else. It is of two sorts (a) Agreeable 
and (3) Disagreeable. They are defined as follows : 

(a). When a mistake of different substance helps the ac 
quirement of the desired object by going to it, it is called 
agreeable or conformable mistake. 

(3). When it does not help the accomplishment of the 
desired result it is called unconformable or disagreeable. 
Like the acquisition of desired results from a conformable 
mistake, worship of the Supreme Brahma is also productive of 
emancipation ; for which, various are the forms of worship 
mentioned in the Ultara Tapniya. 

2. If the ray of a gem be mistaken by one man for a gem, 
and the ray of a lamp mistaken for a gem by another man, 
though both of them are equally subject to mistake, yet there 
is difference ; for if they are tempted to run after the objects of 
their illusion, the first person, inspite of his mistake, becomes 
the master of the gem, while the second for his mistaking a 
lamp for it, can never have the gem : hence the first is art 
instance of agreeable or conformable mistake, and the second, 
its reverse, viz., uncomformable or disagreeable. 

3. If the light of a lamp inside a house issuing from a 
door falls outside ; and elsewhere, the ray of a brilliant jewel 
is similarly projected : 

4. Two persons viewing the two rays of light at a distance, 
run after them, knowing them to be jewels; both of them are 
similarly influenced by mistake caused by the ray. 



5. But that one, who had mistaken the ray of lamp-lighr 
for a gem and had accordingly run in that direction to seize 
the prize, is disappointed, while the other, who for his know 
ledge of a jewel had mistaken it in its ray, is elated with the 
success attending his search. 

f>. Illustrations of the above two varieties of mistake are 
now again particularly set forth. Though the two mistakes are 
equal, yet for an absence of result in the second, namely lamp 
light mistaken for a gem, it is called disagreeing or unconfor- 
mable, and the mistake of gem in its light, is called agreeable 
or conformable for it leads to the possession of the desired 

7. If the sight of vapory exhalations- rising from a spot, 
induce a person to infer fire, and he goes in quest of it, mis 
taking vapor for smoke, and accidently gets it, it can be called 
an instance of conformable mistake. 

8. And if a person believing the waters of the Godavery 
to be Ganges water, bathes in it with a desire of being benefit 
ed, and that bath does produce good results, then it is a con 
formable mistake. 

9. If a person suffering from typhoid fever, pronounces 
the name of Nfarayana mistaking it to be the name of a friend, 
or his son^, whom he wants to summon ; and subsequent to- 
death, inherits the blissful abode of heaven [for that act], it 
is a conformable mistake. 

10. The above are a few of the many instances of confor 
mable mistake, either visible or inferred, mentioned in the 

n. If a conformable mistake be not regarded to be pro 
ductive of result in the manner aforesaid, how then can images 
made of clay, wood, stone, etc., which are all material and 
subject to destruction, be regarded as Devas1 And in 
Knowledge of the five mystic fires, how can woman be wor 
shipped as fire ? 

iz. Moreover it is visibly seen, lhat a different knowledge 


accidentally produces a different result, as in the story of the 
fruit of palm falling from the flight of a crow ; hence it is 
reasonable to expect conformable mistakes producing results. 

13. As conformable mistake, though an error, is produc 
tive of results ; so is the worship of Brahma, like the know 
ledge of Impersonal Brahma, is a cause of person s attaining 

14. With the help of the four means (passivity, self- 
control, and the rest) and the arguments used in the Vedanta., 
one is to ascertain the ordinarily invisible Parabrahma, es 
tablish his oneness with It and worship thus : " I am that 

15. On the subject of the worship of Parabrahma, the 
nature of invisible knowledge is thus set forth. Instead of 
Internally contemplating on the Supreme Brahma as impartite 
bliss, like the worship of the invisible form of Vishnu, 
ordinarily to know " Brahma is," from the proofs mentioned 
in the sacred writings, is here meant for invisible knowledge. 

1 6. Though Vishnu is pointed out in the Shastras to have 
four hands, etc., yet during worship, instead of taking cog 
nisance of that form by the eyes, the wise simply pronounce 
his name in the act of worshipping, and that is acknowledged 
as invisible knowledge. 

17. Now this knowledge of theirs cannot be called un 
true, inasmuch as from the testimony of the Shastras, know 
ledge of his true form shines there intensely. 

18. Inspite of knowing self as eternal intelligence, and 
bliss, according to the Shastras, if intelligence be not duly 
contemplated on as the Impartite, such knowledge does not 
constitute visible knowledge of Parabrahma. 

19. Knowledge of self as eternal, intelligence and bliss 
from the testimony of the sacred writings, though invisible, 
is reckoned as knowledge of reality, for it is not erroneous. 

20. Moreover, it is worth remarking, though invisible 
knowledge of Brahma is comparatively slight, since for It* 


visible perception the transcendental phrase "That art Thou" 
has been explained in the Shastras, to help the cognition of 
each self as Brahma, yet as that knowledge can never accrue 
to the ignorant without due discrimination, therefore the invi 
sible is but another means of knowledge and properly re, 
garded so. 

21. Why is visible knowledge of Brahma so difficult of 
being obtained from want of discrimination in the ignorant? 
To men of ordinary calibre, self is mistaken for the body, 
senses, etc., and as that erroneous conception is ever present, 
they are prevented from grasping self as Brahma, hence 

22. In men having faith in the Shastras, and understand, 
ing them, invisible knowledge of Brahma is easily produced; 
for the visible perception of phenomena a duality is no bar 
to that non-duality; 

23. As in the visible perception of stone, no antagonism 
is created of the invisible knowledge of a Deva, whose image 
that stone is, and in the well-known image of Vishnu there is 
never any dispute. 

24. And regarding that invisible or visible knowledge, 
the examples of persons wanting in faith is not worth being 
taken into consideration, inasmuch as in the Vcdas, only 
persons having faith are said to be qualified to undertake 

25. After having once received instruction from a 
professor free from error, invisible knowledge is sure to 
follow, and no argument is necessary for it, as the instruc 
tion in regard to the form of Vishnu stands in no need of 

26. Thus then, though there is no necessity for arguments 
or discussion to have an invisible knowledge of the Supreme 
Self in the manner aforesaid, yet the arguments used in the 
Shasfras for discussion of works and devotional exercise are 
only for determining the inutility of practising works and 


worship to^hat end :* otherwise it is impossible for any one to 
deal with them as they are divided interminably, 

* In other words, for knowledge of self, neither works nor 
worship is needed. Why ? Because they are naturally antago 
nistic : knowledge produces emancipation which is eternal, works 
and worship enable a person to attain a better sphere hereafter, 
therefore their effects are non-eternal ; knowledge destroys 
ignorance which is the material cause of re-birth, for which a 
theosophist is no more subjected to re-births ; and that ignorance 
Consists in regarding Self to be identical either with the physical 
body, sensory organs, mind, Intellect, etc. The wise are free from 
illusion, they have no belief in the agency or instrumentality of 
Self, he is neither a doer of works, nor an enjoyer of their results, 
consequently they abstain from works save the fructescent, which 
must be exhausted by actual consummation of their results. Caste, 
state of life and condition belong to the body, whose properties 
they are, and not of Self, who is distinct from it, and no other 
than Brahma. For this visible knowledge of Self, and the mis 
taken attribution of caste, and the rest, to Self, having been totally 
destroyed, they, the wise are not engaged in any action. 

The same rule applies to worship ; a difference between a Deva 
and one s Self is an error originating from the intellect ; the wise 
are free from such error. They regard all phenomena to be un 
real, just as objects created in a dream : the only Reality is Intelli 
gence pervading everywhere and that intelligence is called seve 
rally Self, Brahma, Atma, and Paramatma. They are all one. 
Jf we pause to enquire into the nature of results produced by 
devotional exercise, we shall find it to be invisible. For, according 
to theShastras, a worshipper expects to derive benefit by an abode 
in heaven, of which he has an invisible knowledge produced from 
the same source. But knowledge of Brahma produces visible 
results, inasmuch as the person who has acquired it, experiences 
felicity in life, and his miseries are all removed. Hence for this 
difference of products from worship and Self-knowledge, they are 
opposed to each other that is to say, knowledge produces visible 
and worship invisible results : they are naturally opposed, hence 


27. In the Kalpa Sutra, works and worship hive been 
mentioned in a connected form, but when a person has no 
faith, it is impossible for him to practise without proper discri. 
mination, as to what is proper to be done, 

A knower of Brahma has no need of worship. He has no faith 
in the common belief which sets up bondage in self; that has 
been destroyed by knowledge. Works and worship are not 
needed for it, just as in the destruction of snake-illusion, know- 
iedge of the rope is enough and nothing more is needed. It 
would thus be evident, there is a difference in results between 
those of knowledge and works, etc., hence they are respectively 
called visible and invisible. The visible result* is exemplified 
in the illustrations of cloth produced by the weaving loom and 
brush, or thirst and hunger appeased by drink and food. In 
asmuch as all illusions or mistakes are removed by knowledge of 
the abiding seat on which they are superimposed, therefore that 
destruction of mistake or error is a visible result of knowledge : 
similarly knowledge of self removes the mistaken notion of his 
bondage, and emancipation proceeds as a matter of course. But 
it may be contended why is self not subject to re-birth ? Because, 
he is eternal, and naturally unrelated, i.e., free. What is eternal 
-can never be subject to birth and death ; and what is free can 
never be an agent or instrument. If bondage were true, works 
and devotion would be required to cause its destruction, but as 
it is not, therefore that ignorance which creates it on self, is 
removed with his thorough knowledge ; in the same way, as the 
snake created by ignorance in a bit of string, is destroyed when a 
light is brought to bear on it, thus helping its knowledge. Just as 
in the snake-illusion, no work can remove it, but knowledge of the 
rope [in all its parts] is enough to dispel it, so a thorough know 
ledge of the oneness of self with Brahma, destroys the illusion of 
bondage and the other mistakes as to his identity with the body 
and the rest Emancipation has been spoken of as a visible 
result, 1 for the Vedas mention it in that way. If it were otherwise, 
it will be in opposition to them, for emancipation is either eternal 
release, or a temporary abode in heaven. Now of them, the 


sfS. Worship has been described in several works- 
written by Rishis in a practical form, but those who under 
stand them not, nor are capable of discussing the compara 
tive merits of a particular form, when they hear them read, 
repair to a professor for the necessary instruction and pay all 
reverence to him. 

latter is non-eternal, and therefore cannot be same with eternal 
release ; actions and worship procure heaven ; knowledge, eman 
cipation ; actions are non-eternal, their results, equally so ; know 
ledge is eternal, and its product is eternal release. Enough has 
already been said to shew knowledge alone, and not works and 
devotion, or the three together, to be the source of emancipation, 
and to say that like watering the roots o{ a plant yielding fruit, is 
the fruit emancipation produced by works and devotion is im 
proper. Because, watering a tree does not invariably make it- 
bear fruits. It may be reqjuisite for its growth and 1 vitality, so far 
well ; biK in the matter of seed-bearing, other causes are at work : : 
for instance, the usual laws of male and female flowers, and car 
riage of the fertilizing pollen through the pistil into the ovary ; 
some trees have only male flowers, the pollen is conveyed either by 
the wind or the wings of the bee and butterfly unknowingly acting 
as a medium 4 ; for as they come arrd sit in the flower cup to suck 
the honey, a little of the powder which has adhered to the wings 
or feet adhere into the pistil, thence to come in contact with the 
ovisac, and impregnation is complete : when so much is involved in 
the process, how can watering a plant would make it yield fruit ? 
On the other hand, this may be said of it, when a tree is deprived 
of its supply of water, it withers and dries. Plants suck the mois 
ture by their roots and the food is conveyed in a soluble form, to 
be mixed up with the sap, afterwards elaborated into chlorophyle, 
carbon, and so forth ; hence it is said, just as stopping the water 
leads to 1 premature decay and death, and it dries ; so if works and 
worship are done away with, knowledge already produced is des 
troyed, and the result emancipation follows not. But it is a mis 
take. Because, the example does not apply ; for, so far as the 
withering of a tree goes, it is to a certain extent true, especially 


29. Then again, with a view of determining the signifi 
cation of Vtdic words, men analyse and solve them, but in 
the precepts of a trustworthy performer of practice, there is a 
chance of practices being enforced. 

30. As without proper discussion, but simply from ins 
truction, a person may be trained in devotional exercise, so 
from simple instruction no one can have visible knowledge of 

3 1. As want of faith is the one impediment for invisible 

in countries where the heat is intense and the usual rainfall very 
scanty, but to say, abandonding works and worship will bring the 
mind back into its original condition of unsteadiness and make it 
faulty, is far from correct ; so that, like the withered tree of the 
dry land, knowledge will be destroyed, is an assertion not authen 
ticated by proofs either personal or authoritative. In the first 
place, let it be ascertained what shape does the knowledge assume, 
to see if it be ever removed or replaced by anything else ? Every 
where, in the Vedanta, the doctrine of non-duality has been estab 
lished, and it is maintained : when a person has realized that 
oneness of self and Brahma, he exclaims, "I am Brahma." To 
say, that by ceasing to have recourse to actions and devotion a 
theosophist loses this knowledge, is clearly contraindicated : for, on 
appealing to experience, we find the reverse is true. A theoso- 
phibt is never engaged in works and worship, but his perception of 
Brahma is clear enough. His natural love for all creatures is the 
best proof. For Self is the source of affection, and he pervades 
everywhere, hence, "All this is full of Self," consequently he loves 
them equally with Self. Then again, such knowledge is eternal, 
and, therefore, not liable to destrtiction ; it stands in no need of 
protecting care, like that of water as in the case of tree ; their dis 
continuance affects it not, one way or the other ; for when the 
mind has once assumed the modification of the Impartite Brahma, 
all ignorance ceases, and after its destruction, that knowledge of 
oneness with Brahma requires no protection from anything 
injurious. Ignorance is the enemy to knowledge, and when 
it is destroyed, what can injure knowledge ? Clearly nothing. 


knowledge, so want of proper discussion and exercise of judg 
ment is the obstacle to visible knowledge; therefore it is 
necessary to have recourse to arguments and analysis for 
v.sible knowledge of BRAHMA. 

32. If after particular and attentive discussion, no visible 
knowledge follows, yet such is to be repeated over and over 
for that knowledge to set in. 

33. And if discussion, and analysis continued till death, 
brings no cognition of self visibly, even that would not be in 
vain, for in the next re-incarnatiun it will be accomplished. 

34. Because VYAS, the author of Vcdanta Sutras, has 
ascertained it to be a fact, and persons of dull intellect hear 
ing it, fail to comprehend its import, though it is certain for 
knowledge to yield fruits even in another re-incarnation. 

35. As for instance, in the case of BAMDEVA : while in his 
mother s womb he had known BRAHMA, as a result of know 
ledge of a prior existence. 

36. As in the case of study, where the meaning is not 
comprehended, for a part not committed to memory after 
repeated trials and if the subject be not taken up the next 
day or shortly after, yet from repeatedly remembering, it is 

37. As repeated tilling a piece of land makes it fertile 
and it yields abundant crops, so by gradual practice, even Self- 
knowledge will unmistakably bear fruits. 

38. Owing to the presence of three obstacles, some are 
unable to know the Supreme Self, from repeated analysis and 
discussion : this has been fully mentioned by Bartikara. 

39. How can those obstacles be removed ? By searching 
after the cause of their destruction, the social bonds are torn, 
and they are destroyed of themselves. The obstacles are 
past, future, and present. 

40. Even study of the Vtdanta proves ineffectual owing 
to the above obstacles. This has been illustrated in the Sruti 
by the example of HIRANYANIDHI. 



41. Of them, the past obstacle is as follows : Owing 
to an attachment for a milch-buffalow, from the force of 
habit acquired previous to their retirement from society, some 
recluse fail to have a firm knowledge of self; this is known 
too well : 

42. But when after receiving instruction from a Guru, 
by kind and sympathising words, the obstacles are destroyed 
then their Self-knowledge becomes firm, it is confirmed; 

43. Present obstacle is of this nature : Firm attachment 
to property, riches and the rest, is called present obstacle. It 
spoils knowledge, creates illusion, raises ill assorted objec 
tions, and begets an inclination to dispute and wrangle. 

44. But passivity, self-control, etc., and hearing, consi 
deration, etc., requisite for the time being, destroy it with 
the rest, and pave the way for the fruits of knowledge to ac 
crue easily. 

45. Future obstacle is in this wise : On the subject of 
the rising of knowledge in BAMDEVA, it has been said, the 
presence of fructescent works, for the next or another incar 
nation, is called future obstacle. It was exhausted in him 
by enjoying during his sojourn in one incarnation, but BHARAT 
had to enjoy them in three successive re-incarnations, before 
they were exhausted. 

46. A person who has failed in Yoga, or been deprived of 
it, exhausts his obstacle by the practices of several incarnations, 
inasmuch as there can never be an undoing of the results of 
discussion and analysis. To this end KRISHNA says to AEJUNA 
(Gita> Chapt. 6., V. 41.) as follows: 

47. " From the meritorious actions of prior life, after 
having inherited the blissful abode of heaven, etc., he is born 
from the force of Self-knowledge, in a noble family, with 
wealth and rank, as best he wishes. 

48. "Or, from the strength of that virtue, and discussion 
of BRAHMA, he is born in the family of an intellectual Yogi 
free from any desire, but this is extremely rare : 


49. " Because, in that life, after having been re-possessed 
of his previous knowledge and connected with intellect, he 
again follows the path that leads to knowledge of BRAHMA. 

50. "Attracted by the impression of former practices 
which have well nigh from disuse become deadened, his at 
tachment to them grows strong; in this manner, after having 
passed through several re-incarnations and realised the fruits 
of knowledge, ultimately merges into the Absolute, and is 

51. Even with a desire of acquiring the abode of Brahmd 
being present, when a person restrains it, and enquires into 
the Supreme Self with due discrimination, he does not get a 
direct knowledge of the SUPREME BRAHMA, visibly, it is true : 

52. But after having ascertained it, in the manner laid 
down in the Vedania, he goes to the abode of Brahmd, to 
enjoy felicity for a time, ultimately in the end of Kalpa* to be 
freed with Brahmd. 

53. In some, knowledge of a previous life, acquired by 
the help of the arguments used in the Vedanla, is concluded 
by falling into the practice of works, inasmuch as some are 
unable even to hear the reality of Supreme Self being talked 
of or read ; and some fail to comprehend its import even after 
having heard it. 

54. But either from dullness of intellect or want of purity 
of mind, when a person is incapacitated from ascertaining self 
by the help of supporting arguments, it is proper for him to be 
constantly engaged in the worship of the SUPREME BRAHMA 
in the invisible manner. As " BRAHMA is." 

55. To worship the Impersonal BRAHMA in the above 
manner [invisible form] is not inconsistent; as in the personal 
method, the flow of the mental function is directed towards 
him, so here also, there is a likelihood of his faith in the 

* A day and night of Brahmd a period of 4,320,000,000 solar 
sidereal years. 


existence of BRAHMA being confirmed and thus invisible know 
ledge resulting [ultimately]. 

56. If it be asked since the form of BRAHMA is beyond the 
reach of word and mind, how then it is possible to worship 
Him invisibly? In that case, let there be no visible krowledge 

57. If you know Him to be beyond the reach of word 
and mind, why not admit his invisible worship in that 
manner ? 

58. If you say : To acknowledge BRAHMA as an object 
of worship will reduce him to a Personal [God], possessing 
attribuies ? But then how can you do away with it in his 
visible knowledge? Therefore worship him invisibly by 
Indicative Indications. 

59. In the Sruti occurs the passage " What is beyond 
the reach of word and mind, know that to be BRAHMA." And 
" Whom people worship is not BRAHMA. 

60. If you admit the above, then as " BRAHMA is distinct 
from the known and unknown" (Sruti): this passage would 
necessarily make us refuse his visible knowledge; for, as 
his worship is interdictible so is his knowableness equally. 

61. If you regard BRAHMA to be unknowable, what pre 
vents you from acknowledging BRAHMA to be not worshippable ? 
inasmuch as knowledge and worship are equally functions of 
the internal organ and pervaded by it. 

62. If you ask, why am I so fond of worship as to main 
tain its practice and explain it ? I may stop to enquire, why 
are you so averse to it ? to say proofs are wanting for im 
personal worship is quite inconsistent. 

63. For proofs to that effect abound in the Uttar 
Tapniya, Prashna, Katho and Mandukya Upanishads. 

64. The method of its practice has been mentioned in 
connection with quintuplication, if you admit it to be a means 
for the acquisition of knowledge, I have no objection. 

65. If you say, no*one has ever practised the invisible 



worship of the SUPREME BRAHMA : the reply is that does not 
indicate any defect in the worship, but it is the fault of the 
person who does not practise ic. 

66. For, no matter whether an ignorant person be en 
gaged in the recantation of the formulae for making a person 
submissive, considering it to be easier than worship, or the 
stupid considering cultivation to be easier still, be engaged 
in it accordingly, that does not imply any fault in worship. 

67. So far as the inclination of the dull and ignorant are 
concerned, though there may be other points of discussion, 
it is proper to judge becomingly as to the superiority of the 
Impersonal worship ; owing to the unity of all the ordained 
knowledges in the Vedanta, the well-known attributes, over 
and over declared in all Branches of the Vedas, are in the 
end centred in the Invisibly to be worshipped PARABRAHMA. 

68. Bliss, etc., are all centred in PARABRAHMA, in the end, 
by VYAS in the n Sutra of the $rd Sect. Chapt., III., of the 

69. In the 3$rd Sutra of the same work, VYAS describes 
BRAHMA in the end as neither gross nor diminutive qualities 
which are fit for being excluded. 

70. If therefore any one were to contend : to attribute 
qualities to the Impersonal BRAHMA is unreasonable and in 
consistent, that remark applies to VYAS who wrote so, and 
not to us. 

71. If you say, since there is no mention of Hiranya- 
kesha, Hiranyashashru, Sun or other forms by way of illus 
tration, I admit the above worship to be Impersonal. The 

-reply is, be you content with that. 

72. Then again, if to enquire into the attributes, you say 
to be purposeless though admitting the desirability of knowing 
BRAHMA by Indication, be you engaged in that form of Its 

73. That self who is indicated by blissfulness, or who is 
not gross (i. #., subtle), is one Impartite with the Supreme 


Self. And " That am I :" this is the way by which you should 
worship him. 

74. If it be asked what is the distinction between kno\y- 
ledge and worship ? The reply is : There is particular dis 
tinction between them, knowledge is dependent on the subs 
tance that is to be known, while worship is dependent on indi 
vidual desire. 

75. From discrimination or exercise of judgment is pro 
duced knowledge ; when that has once been confirmed, in spite 
of disinclination on the part of the person, it cannot be pre 
vented. With knowledge, illusion of the reality of phenomena 
is at once destroyed. 

76. Thus a theosophist is successful in accomplishing 
what he was about, and attains perfect contentment. He is 
"delivered in life" waiting only for the consummation of his 
fructescent works. 

77. A person of faith believing on the Reality of instruc 
tion received from a preceptor, should always with due disrimi- 
nation and judgment enquire after, and become one with it, 
by concentrating his mind with earnest attention. 

78. So long as he knows not self to be non-distinct from 
PARABRAHMA, he should constantly give himself up to medita. 
tion ; and when that non-duality has been firmly established, 
there is no more necessity for thinking : he will then be freed 
from death. 

79. A Brahmachari worshipper of non-distinction from 
self with BRAHMA, keeps that non-duality constantly in mind 
and is engaged in begging for his daily bread. 

80. To worship in this way, or not to worship, or to do 
it in any other manner, proceeds from a person s desire which 
is its extraordinary cause, so that to remove that want of desire 
will make the current of the internal organ constantly assume 
the modification of BRAHMA. 

81. Asa person studying the Vcdas, from the habit of 
constant study bereft of all doubts and mistakes, in dream 


also \s engaged in that study ; or like one engaged in repeating 
the sacred texts from desire, a worshipper, from the force of 
practice is engaged in meditation while in dream. 

82. When contending knowledge is cured, and a person 
is always engaged in thinking of self, in dream also he ac 
quires the habit of meditation. 

83. Even during the consummation of fructescent works, 
from a good deal of faith, one is able to meditate constantly, 
and no doubts remain on that subject : 

84. Like a woman fond of associating with her lover, 
though engaged in the performance of her household duties, 
is ever thinking of tasting the sweets of that illicit intercourse. 

85. And though her household works are not managed 
quite irregularly yet they are only done in a perfunctory man 

86. Like a house-wife busy with her household work, that 
other woman desirous of courting her lover s embrace can 
never show a similar attention or order and regularity in 
performing her duties, for she is wanting in earnestness : 

87. So is a person engaged in meditation able to keep up 
a trace of the ordinary popular practices, and a theosophist 
is quite able to keep up with them, as they cannot destroy or 
affect his knowledge in any way. 

88. The world is illusory and self is intelligence : in this 
knowledge there is no antagonism to popular practice. 

89. A theosophist knowing the unreality of the world, 
still uses it, and knowing self to be intelligence is yet engaged 
n the usual means of that knowledge as in use among men : 

90. Because the means to that end, mind, word, body and 
external objects he cannot do away with, consequently it is 
very natural that he should be using them. 

91. One who by thinking, has his mind freed from its 
ever changing function is not a theosophist, he is called a 
meditator ; for in determining the nature of external objects 


which are in daily use, as a jar, etc., there is no necessity for 
making the mind so firm. 

92. With the manifestation of the mental function once, a 
jar is known, why is not A/ma who is self-illuminated to be 
discovered without the destruction of the mind ? 

93. If it be said, though BRAHMA (is self illuminated, yet 
the flow of the mental function directed to It, is called know 
ledge of self, but that modification of the mental function is 
liable to destruction every moment, consequently it is neces 
sary to rest it on BRAHMA over and over. The reply is : It 
holds equally true in the cognition of a jar, etc. 

94. If you reply, after the intellect has discovered a 
jar to a certainty, even with its debit uuion, it is quite easy 
to cognise it again ; analogy will draw a similar conclusion 
with regard to Self. 

95. After the intellect has been once fixed in self, what 
ever may a theosophist desire, he is enabled to consider or 
meditate ; and to say, what another has in mind. 

96. And if like a worshipper, a theosophist engaged in 
meditation forgets the usual practices, it is then said to be 
produced from meditation, because knowledge never creates 
such forgettulness of popular practices. 

97. To a theosophist meditation is optional, dependent 
on his desire, because emancipation resuhs from knowledge^as 
mentioned in tne Shastras over and over. " Knowledge pro 
duces non-duality." 

98. If a theosophist does not betake to meditation, but 
is engaged in the external practices of men, let him go on with 
them ; for there is no impediment to his being so engaged 
in the daily routine of practice. 

99. If for a theosophist to be engaged with worldly prac 
tices, you say, imply excess of attachment, the question is 
what do you call excess of attachment? If you refer to the 
sanction and prohibition of SAastras that does not apply 
to him. 


100. One who has a conceit for his caste, station in life, 
Condition, etc., to him only does that sanction and prohibition 
laid down in the sacred writings apply ; but to a theosophist 
free from conceit, it is inapplicable. 

101. Caste, station and the rest are from illusion attr u 
buted to the physical body, but to self, who is eternal and 
intelligence they belong not ; and this is the firm knowledge 
of a theosophist. 

102. No matter whether they practise profound medita 
tion, works, etc., or not, from want of faith in the reality of 
the universe in their internal organ, they are called pure 
Theosophists and "delivered in life." 

103 Works or no works can produce no injury to them, 
and meditation or no meditation, or recanting of sacred 
formulae or its reverse, can produce neither benefit nor injury ; 
for their minds are free from desire. 

104. Self is unassociated, eternal intelligence ; saving him, 
everything else is due to Maya or illusion, as unreal as things 
produced in a magical performance : when such an impres 
sion has been confirmed, there is no room for any desire to 
remain in the mind. 

105. If therefore, for a theosophist there is nothing proper 
and improper, in short the sanctioned and forbidden rites can 
bring him neither merit nor demerit where then is his excess 
of attachment ? That can only hold good in a person who 
has attachment, but to speak of excess in connection with him 
who has no attachment whatever, is illogical. 

1 06. As in the absence of sanction or law, that excess 
does not hold good with regard to boys, so there being 
neither any rule nor prohibition, so far as theosophists are 
concerned, it is impossible to apprehend any excess of at 
tachment in them. 

107. If it be alleged, boys have no knowledge of what is 
lawful and unlawful, consequently the rule of sanction and pro 
hibition does not apply to them ; it may as well be said iu 


regard to a theosophist, that as he knows the unreality of this 
material expanse and reality of self and his non-distinction 
from BRAHMA, he has nothing lawful and unlawful ; for that 
sanction and prohibition has been mentioned in the Shastras, 
only for the guidance of the less knowing, and no rules have 
been laid down either for theosophists or the ignorant. 

108. Any one possessing the power of cursing and bless 
ing another [so as to make them actually come to pass] 
Should not be regarded as a theosophist ; for the ability to 
curse and bless effectually is a result of devout and rigid 
austerities (Tapasya}. 

109. Nor shall knowledge be credited with powers like 
those which the supremely wise VYAS and others had, for they 
are the result of devout austerities. And that (Tapasya) devo 
tion, which causes knowledge, has no such result : knowledge 
is its [only] product. 

110. One who has achieved success both in devout aus 
terities and devotion (the cause of knowledge) gets both the 
ability of cursing, etc., as well as knowledge ; otherwise there 
does not follow one set of results from one sort of practice, 
when he betakes to the other for acquiring Self-knowledge. 
One engaged in practising the means of knowledge gets only 
knowledge as a result. 

in. If you say, men conforming to no sanctioned prac 
tice and without any ability are spoken ill of by ascetics (Fati}. 
That is not so very grave a charge, inasmuch as men devoted 
to sensual pleasures speak disparagingly of ascetics, thus each 
in turn is equally a subject of reproach from the other. 

112. And those sensualists revile in this wise : If ascetics 
betake to begging for the sake of enjoyment, wear the usual 
clothing, etc., for the sake of happiness, how astonishingly 
exquisite is their asceticism ? Indeed under weight of asceticism 
has their indifference to worldly enjoyments succumbed ! 

113. If you say, to be thus reviled by ignorant persons 
can bring forth no injury to them, it may as well be said of a 


theosophist, that the treatment which he meets with, at the 
hands of persons who consider self to be their physical body, 
etc., is of little import. 

114. In this way, without removing external objects, as a 
means of knowledge, a theosophist is yet able to carry on the 
ordinary duties of a king and administrator or the usual 
popular practices without suffering any detrimental effect. 

115. If it be alleged, after having discovered all material 
objects to be unreal, a wise person can have no more desire for 
them ; the reply is, certainly it is so far true, but fructescent 
actions engage him either in meditation, or practice [common 
amongst men, as eating, sleeping and the rest] as he likes. 

116. A devout worshipper should always betake to medi 
tation, for like attaining the abode of Vishnu, through medita 
tion he has become BRAHMA [by his knowledge of non- 

117. What is caused by meditation, should naturally be 
undone by its want ? Hence a worshipper should always me 
ditate ; but after a person has known self to be no other than 
BRAHMA, if he were to abandon the means of knowledge, that 
would not destroy it. 

118. Knowledge is only for the attainment of BRAHMA 
(not its cause), and it assures a person that he is so ; therefore, 
in the absence of knowledge, and non-existence of knower, 
firm persuasion of the identity of self with BRAHMA is never 

119. And if you regard a worshipper to have accom 
plished his identity with the eternal PARABRAHMA what prevents 
you from looking dull and ignorant persons as well the lower 
animals from an equal accomplishment of their identity 
with It ? 

120. For, in the absence of Self-knowledge both are 
equally placed, so far as emancipation goes. As to beg for 
bread is better than starvation, so it is better to rwve recourse 
to meditation instead of doing nothing. 


ui. Instead of following the course of practice in vogue 
among the ignorant, to have recourse to the usual actions 
[sanctioned in the sacred writings] is preferable, better than 
that is the form of Personal worship, and Impersonal worship 
is the best of all. 

122. So long as a person reaches not the portal of know, 
ledge, his progression gets gradually advanced ; but Imperso 
nal worship is afterwards developed into Self-knowledge and 
counted as such. 

123. As during the time of reaping results, a conformable 
mistake can be looked upon as correct proof, so is matured 
Impersonal worship equal to Self-knowledge, during emanci 

124. If you say, a person inclined to a conformable mis 
take accomplishes the desired result by other proofs, what harm 
is there for worship becoming a cause of Self-knowledge by 
any other proof, during emancipation ? 

125. If any sort of Personal worship or recanting sacred 
formulae, etc., by clearing the mind of all blemishes leads 
indirectly, i.e., secondhand, to visible knowledge, and they 
are therefore regarded as its cause, yet as a direct cause of 
knowledge, Impersonal worship has many points of parti 

126. That Impersonal worship when matured, ultimately 
leads to profound meditation, hence by profound unconscious 
meditation it is easily attainable. 

127. After that profound unconscious meditation,* has 
been thoroughly practised and one has become proficient in it, 
there remains only the unassociated Intelligence in the inter- 

* When the mind comes to centre all its thoughts on the Impar- 
tite (Universal) Consciousness, after having surmounted the four 
obstacles, like the unflickering light of a lamp, by devout and pro 
found meditation, it is called the (Xirvikalpu Santadhi) Unconsci 
ous meditation. 


nal organ, and when by repeated practice that has been re 
moved, he discovers his oneness with the SUPREME BRAHMA as 
expounded in the signification of "That art Thou ?" 

128. And the unchangeable unassQciated, eternal self- 
illuminated Intelligence of PARABRAHMA is easily fixed in the 

129. This has been fully declared in the Amritabindu 
Upanishad. Thus then, for the sake of acquiring Self-know 
ledge by means of profound unconscious meditation, Imperso 
nal worship is the best and superior to personal, etc. 

130. Those who undertake the Personal form of worship, 
heeding not what has just been said about the superiority of 
the Impersonal leading to Self-knowledge by its direct means 
of profound unconscious meditation, are best compared with 
the popular illustration of refusing to take what is in the hand 
and getting satisfied with licking it by the tongue. 

131. The above illustration applies equally to those who 
are engaged in Impersonal worship leaving off discrimination 
of self. For this reason, worship has been laid down autho 
ritatively necessary to those, with whom exercise of judgment 
or analysis for discrimination of self is impossible. 

132. A person whose mind is distracted with several 
things, say accumulation of riches, aggrandisement of others, 
etc., has no possibility of acquiring Self-knowledge by due 
discrimination; consequently worship is essentially necessary 
to him, for clearing the internal organ of all blemishes and 
making it faultless. 

133. But those, who are desirous of release, have been 
cured of unsteadiness or fickleness of mind [hence worship is 
not needed for them]. Their internal organ is simply enve 
loped in fascination, and discrimination of self is very desir 
able, as it is superior to all other means for it easily leads to 

134. In evidence of Self-knowledge, as a means of the par 
ticular forms of emancipation mentioned in Yoga and Sankhya t 


the Gita says : "Whatever result is obtainable from Sankhya, 
is equally produced by Yoga ; therefore, he who knows them to 
be non-distinct, is a real knower of the purport of the Shastra." 
(Chap. V., v., 5 ) 

135. Nor is the Gita the only authority, for we find proofs 
to that effect in the Sruti: "Knowledge of self is expounded 
in Yoga and Sankhya Philosophy as a source of emancipation. 
Here both the Sruti and the two above-mentioned Systems 
agree, but in matters where they disagree from the Sruti they 
should not be considered as proofs. 

136. A person unsuccessful in maturing worship in his 
present life, attains the abode of tirahmd after death, and in a 
subsequent, emancipation, *from Self-knowledge. 

* "Om is BRAHMA, and you should look upon its alphabets, re 
presenting tlie SUPREME BRAHMA, to be non-different from yourself, 
and have your mental function so moulded after it, that it may re 
main fixed or impressed there. No other meditation can equal this : 
*md in his work on Quintuplication, SURESWAR has particularly 
dealt on it. Though many of the Upanishads treat on Pranab, yet 
the Munduka has particular reference to it : and from the annota 
tions of the Commentator as well as those of A NANDAGIRI, the sub 
ject has been clearly explained. Vartikara [SURESWAR ACHARYA] 
has also adopted the same method in his work on Quintuplication. 

Meditating on the mystic Om 1 can be done in two ways accord 
ing to the Upanishads ; one is to identify it with the SUPREME 
BRAHMA, aud thus to reflect and meditate profoundly on that abs 
tract condition of impersonality which is devoid of qualities. The 
other is to meditate on BRAHMA with qualities (personal). Now 
the Impersonal BRAHMA is called the SUPREME BRAHMA, while that 
other is called the (Personal) BRAHMA with qualities ; and one 
engaged in the first sort of devotion obtains release ; while to the 
follower of the second method can accrue the abode of Brahma. 
Ihusthen, we find meditation of Ow/frorn a difference in the 
method and subject of worship, is divided into two sorts, of which 
the Impersonal alone will be coiibidercd here, 


137. Whatever ideas take hold of a dying person s mind, 
after death he assumes that condition accordingly ; for concen 
tration of mind invariably produces the result of similarity of 

138. The future life of the individual is determined by his 
good or bad thoughts during his last moments; if that be 
certain, it is natural to infer that like a worshipper centering his 
east thoughts on this Personal worship, having his mind mould 
ed after Him, the follower of Impersonal worship has his 
knowledge moulded after the Impersonal BRAHMA. 

139. Emancipation and attainment of BRAHMA are only 
a difference in name; otherwise both have for their significa 
tion deliverance, and like conformable mistake, are equally 
productive of result. 

140. Though Impersonal worship is a variety of mental 
action, and not a direct cause of emancipation, yet it leads to 
knowledge by which ignorance is removed ; as meditation of 
Benares (which itself is not free) produces knowledge of 

141. In the Tapaniya Upanishad is thus mentioned eman 
cipation produced as a result of Impersonal worship : "With 
desire, without desire, without body, without senses, without 

For, the worshippers of the personal creator are actuated with a 
desire of enjoying the fruit of their devotion, and this they get 
by inheriting the blissful abode of BRAHMA ; and as that very 
desire stands an obstacle in the way of impersonal devotion, 
they are prevented from acquiring the necessary knowledge, and, 
therefore, subjected to bondage, and never freed. Now while 
enjoining the blissful abode of Brahma, and sharing all enjoy 
ments equally with Hiranyagarbha, if the individual acquires 
knowledge, he may yet be freed. But those who have no desire of 
inherting the Brahmaloka, acquire knowledge here and are freed. 
Thus then, the results of the Personal worship are included in the 
Impersonal. Vicharsagar, pp. 199-200. 


any fear are the indications of emancipation in Impersonal 

142. According to the strength of worship is produced 
knowledge, the cause of emancipation. "Therefore, without 
knowledge there are no other means of emancipation," as 
mentioned in the . hastras, implies no antagonism to worship. 

143. For this purpose it is said " Worship without any 
d< sire of reaping its result produces emancipation" (Tapaniya}. 
" And worship with desiie leads to the abode of truth" 
(Prashnopanishad) . 

144. One who worships Om with a desire of being bene 
fited, attains the abode of Brahmd, where after acquiring 
Self-knowledge he is released with its king, at the end of 

145. The Shariraka Sutras (Chapt. IV., p. III., Sutra 
XV.,) mention the attainment of the abode of Brahmd as a 
result of Personal worship, according to the desiie of the 
individual : 

146. " From the force of Impersonal Worship after reach 
ing there, he acquires Self -know ledge to be released with 
Brahmd when his time comes at the expiry of the Kalpd." 

147. Worship of Om has everywhere been described as 
almost Impersonal. In some places, it is said to be Personal, 
and their results have thus been ascertained : 

148. Om is the proof on which rests both Personal and 
Impersonal forms of worship. This was the instruction giveir 
to MAHAKAM by PIPLADA in reply to his question. 

149. Thus knowing Om to be the prop, whatever worship 
a person undertakes either of the Personal or Impersonal 
BRAHMA, he gets results according to his desire; so said l\una 
to NACHIKETA (Kathopanishad}. 

* "A day and night of Brahmd, a period of 4,320,000,000 
Solarsydereal-years of mortals, measuring the duration of the 
world, and as many, the interval of its annihilation." WILSON. 


156. To the worshipper of the Impersonal is produced 
visible knowledge of PARABRAHMA either in his present life or 
the next, or in the abode of Brahma ; and the result of that 
worship can never remain unfructified : 

151. Therefore one who is unable to weigh and make 
proper use of the arguments used, should constantly worship 
self, as clearly set forth in the A/ma Gita. 

152. For example: "He who is unable to know me 
manifestly, should depend on me without any fear and mis 
apprehension, and when subsequently that has been confirm 
ed, in due time, I shall appear unto him as the giver of 

153. "As when a deep mine has been discovered, there 
is no other means save that of digging, for getting at the 
gem; so without reflection of self, there is no other means by 
which I can be manifestly known." 

154. How reflection of self produces visible knowledge 
of PARASRAHMA is thus being declared : By removing the bit 
of stone in the shape of the physical body from the ground, 
and repeatedly turning the sod by the spade of intellect, mind 
is cleared of all-blemishes, and a person desirous of release 
is successful in discovering me like the gem in a mine. 
And there is no doubt about it. 

155. Advisableness of meditation for one not qualified 
to Self-knowledge is thus illustrated : One who is not 
qualified in discovering PARABRAHMA should think and reflect 
" I am PARABRAHMA." Since unreal objects can be had from 
meditation, Why is the Real BRAHMA, who is eternal and free, 
should not be had in that way ? 

156. From meditation, is gradually destroyed the usual 
knowledge of not-Self in self ; and one who knows this and 
yet keeps himself off from meditation is a brute. 

157. By abandoning conceit for the body, and cognising 
BRAHMA in self, Jiva becomes immortal, and enjoys the 
supreme felicity of BRAHMA in his present life. 

3 2 


158. Now for the result : Having thoroughly understood 
the present treatise, who keeps it constantly present in hts 
mind, is freed from all doubts and is delivered from metem 
psychosis, for his constant meditation and reflection of self. 


Illustration by cimparision to a Theatrical Performance. 

ILLUSORY attribution and its withdrawal, are now being intro 
duced in opening the present treatise, with the view of helping 
the comprehension of self and enabling a pupil easily to ac 
quire that knowledge. Prior to the evolution of the world 
there existed the one and secondless Supreme Self, full of 
bliss. Out of his desire, created He the world with Maya, 
and entered each individual in the form of Jiva. 

2. Created He the superior bodies of Devas y and enter 
ing them, himself became Deva ; in the same way, did he 
create the mean and worthless bodies of images and entering 
them, became their worshipper out of ignorance. 

3. After having been engaged in several prior births till 
death, in worship, a person begets an inclination for Self- 
knowledge ; subsequently by discrimination and exercise of 
judgment, when spiritual ignorance about the reality of 
phenomena and attachment to mundane enjoyments is 
destroyed, and associates removed, he knows self to be pure 
and eternal, and thus abides his time. 

4. The Supreme Self is secondless and blissful, but to 
consider otherwise and to regard himjas subject to grief and 
misery is called bondage ; and to rest on his real nature is 
called emancipation. 

5. Want of discrimination causing the bondage in self is 
removed by discrimination. Therefore it is imperatively ne 
cessary always to reflect on the points of resemblance and 
difference between Jiva and Paramatma. 

6. Apart from the body and organs of sense and action, 
Jtva for his cenceit of egoism is the literal signification of "I 
am I," the agent or instrument ; and mind is his instrument 
of action, Actions produced by the internal or external func- 

1 tions are all his, 


7. The internal function modified into " I am I" 
expresses the agent or instrument. And the external modi 
fication of this discovers all phenomena. 

8. Subjects of external knowledge are characterised with 
distinct properties : for instance, smell, form, taste, sound, 
and touch; and for perceiving each of them, we have five 
organs of external sense, which are called instruments of 
action accordingly. 

9. Now the witnessing Intelligence or Supreme Self is 
the discoverer of Jiva as an agent, mental action, and of the 
five properties of objects abovementioned at one time. 

10. As the light of a theatre discovers equally the pro 
prietor, dancing girls, actors and spectators who have assem 
bled to witness a performance; and when none of them are 
there, the light burns and illuminates itself : 

11. So, sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch; and 
egoism, function of intellect, and phenomena are illuminated 
coetaneously by the light of Witnessing Intelligence ; 

12. And in their absence, it burns intensely and is as 
conspicuous as before. 

13. From f he incessant resplendency of the light of 
Uniform Intelligence, the individual intellect draws its powers 
ef discovery, and assumes several modifications, just as dancing, 
girls throw their figures in several attitudes to make it more 

14. And the particular distinction is this: Egoism is 
the householder; objects resemble the audience; intellect, 
danseuse ; senses, musicians; witnessing intelligence, light. 
Such a theatre is fit for the intellect to dance in. 

15. As tiie light in the th-eatre though confined in one 
spot illuminates the whole place equally, so the Witnessing 
Inte ! : r .i nce though resting quietly, discovers internally and 
externally at the same time. 

1 6. ( Internal and external have reference to the 


relation of the body : the first stands for egoism, etc. ; and 
the second, objects situated external to the body). 

17. Though Intellect is situated inside the body, yet in 
connection with the sensory organs it repeatedly pervades ex 
ternal objects which it seeks to cognise; and its fickle and 
unsteady nature discovered or illuminated by the Witnessing 
Intelligence is from illusion attributed to the Witness in 
va j nr _f or it is steady and tranquil and has no wavering 

18. As by moving the hand to and fro, in a few rays of 
fixed light entering a room through a crevice, makes that 
light appear to be moving, while virtually it is fixed : 

19. Similarly the Witnessing Intelligence though situated 
in its own site, and neither gets in or out, is apt to be taken 
for the unsteadiness of intellect, as going out and coming 
j n which virtually it never does. 

20. That Intelligence has neither any locality external 
nor internal, which belongs to the Intellect. And when the 
interminable associates of intellect are destroyed, it rests in 
the resplendent effulgence of its own light. 

21. Though after destruction of all associates, in the 
absence of a province, it is impossible for its manifestibility 
to continue everywhere, yet in the presence of a practical 
province its pervasion is admissible from that relation. 

22. Like Its pervasion, PARABRAHMA is everywhere a wit 
ness. As Intellect is capable of going either internally or 
externally everywhere, whatever may be the time, and how 
ever distant a subject which it wishes to take cognition 
of, so does PARABRAHMA, for It is the witness that discovers all 
phenomena, and the intellect is a mere reflected shadow of 
Its intelligence. 

23. Whatever objects with form, etc., are cognised by the 
intellect, they are all discovered by PARABRAHMA, as their wit 
ness ; though virtually, He is beyond the reach of word and 


24. It may be contended, since Self is beyond the reach 
of word and thought how is he then to be grasped ? Cease 
doing it then. Discrimination of the Reality of Self and 
unreality of the material universe, removes the perception of 
its being something tangible; and when it has ceased to 
exist to all intents and purposes, then as the residue of its 
destruction, Self is manifested in the form of truth, and thus 
continues to subsist. 

25. No proofs are necessary to make Self visible, for he 
is self-illuminated. And if proofs be needed to help the 
intellect, repair to a professor and receive instruction from 
him in the Srufi. 

26. Having in the aforesaid manner taught the means 
of discriminating Self to a superiorly qualified person, another 
method is now being pointed out for the benefit of others 
who are incapable of practising it. Those unable to cast 
away material perceptions, should take protection of their 
intellect. Because as through that intellect all objects, both 
external and internal, are known, and e Supreme Self as 
their witness is dependent on it, therefore is he to be inferred 
as such witness. 



(a) Yoganandd. 

[WITH the view of producing an inclination in the pupil id 
study the work, its importance is thus set forth ] : I shalt 
now speak of BRAHMAIC felicity, which being known, a persort 
abando-ns all works, as they are based on ignorance, and 
experiences happiness by becoming BRAHMA. 

2. To demonstrate the truth of the assertion "knowledge 
Of BRAHMA destroys ignorance together with its product the 
objective world, and procures emancipation," the author 
quotes two texts from the Taiteriya Upanishad " A knower of 
BRAHMA attains the Supreme BRAHMA." " A knower of Self 
surmounts all grief." And explains them in the following 
wise: One who knows BRAHMA acquires the supreme bliss- 
fulness of BRAHMA; and one, who knows Self to be infinite, 
surmounts all grief, inasmuch as any ill befalling one con 
nected to him fails to affect him. If it be contended, the word 
Supreme BRAHMA in the first passage cannot have for its signi 
fication felicity, but that it expresses secondlessness : therefore 
to remove such a misapprehension it is said, BRAHMA as Self is 
the essence, and a theosophist knowing his oneness with It 
experiences happiness, and save this knowledge there are no 
other means capable of producing it. 

3. When a theosophist rests on the Supreme Self know 
ing him to be non-distinct from hrs individual Self, his fears 

* The five following treatises are all explanatory of BRAHMAIC 
felicity, for which they have been laid down as so many chapters 
of one book " Brahmananda." Now the felicity which arises from 
concentration of the mind (Yoga) is also included in it, and 
this is the subject of the present work. It is proper here to 
observe that instead of following the author s classification we 
would go on with the serial number of the Sections, otherwise 
the Panchadasi (composed of fifteen works would be incomplete. 


cease; and one who does not, but believes them to be dis 
tinct, is subject to fear. 

4. "Notwithstanding the practice of religious observances 
and meritorious works in a prior state of existence, this 
knowledge of distinction (duality) has been the cause of fear ; 
and for that fear of Brahma, Air, Sun, Fire and Death are 
engaged in their several spheres. 

5. "After the cognition of the felicity of BRAHMA, a 
person is no more affected with any fears concerning the 
present or future. For a theosophist is never distressed with 
thoughts of good actions left Undone and bad deeds done, 
like the common run of humanity; [inasmuch as he knows 
Self to be actionless, and no doer or enjoyer.J 

6. "Abandoning works good and bad, such a theosophist, 
remembering his non-difference with BRAHMA is always en 
gaged in meditating on Self, and actions (good and bad) done 
and looked upon as Self.* 

7. " Visible knowledge of the Supremef Self destroys 
all maladies of the internal organ, clears away doubts, and 
extinguishes good and bad works. 

8. " And for surmounting death, there is no other means 
save the knowledge that each individual Self is BRAHMA; it 
weakens the fetters passions and desires removes misery 
and prevents metempsychosis. 

* How are actions regarded as self? When virtue and vice, 
or merit and demerit have equally been discarded, they can no 
more cause any pain ; moreover, works are the result of the 
physical body, with its organs of action and sense, and a theoso 
phist sees self everywhere. For " whatever is, is self," so that 
for want of distinction between him and works, they are regarded 
one with him. 

t The word "Supreme" need not unnecessarily create an 
anthropomorphic deity, what it is very apt to signify, what is 
sought to be conveyed is the infinite superiority of self over 
t clc. 


(}. . "That knowledge enable men of tranquil mind to 
be above pleasure and pain even in the present life ; and 
neither bad nor good works done or left undone bring forth 
any pain." 

10. Are these the only proofs? No. Knowledge of 
Self as a source of destroying ignorance and removing worth 
less and harmful works is amply testified in the Sruti, Puratt, 
and Smriti. As for instance, " When a person knows full 
well the physical body, he knows the truth, and when he mis 
takes it for Self, suffers pain." "A knower of BRAHMA is 
never subject to death; stupid and ignorant persons are 
re-incarnated to suffer in a subsequent sphere of objective 
existence." " Those among the Devas, who know BRAHMA, 
become one with the Supreme Self." "Those, who know their 
individual Self to be one with BRAHMA, enjoy all manner of 
temporal happiness" (Sruti}. " Self is present everywhere in 
&11 material objects, as they are in him ; and a person engaged 
in considering his oneness with BRAHMA, attains emancipa 
tion." " BRAHMA, the Universal Witness, when seen as Self, 
destroys ignorance together with its product, the source of all 
harm." So say the Puran and Smriti. [Therefore] know 
ledge of BRAHMA destroys all injurious and harmful works 
and produces felicity." 

11. There are three distinct varieties of felicity, vtz., 
the first is now being considered. 

12. BHRIGU, the son of VARUNA, hearing the indications of 
BRAHMA from his father^ ceased regarding the foodful, vital, 
mental and cognitional sheaths as BRAHMA, and identified 
blissfulness with It. [The subject of the discourse between 
the father and son, who was being instructed in knowledge 
of BRAHMA, ran as follows ; " From whom all living things have 
sprung into existence, continue to exist, and unto whom afcer 
death return, know that to be BRAHMA." This indication of 
BRAHMA does not apply to the several sheaths, foodful and the 



rett, consequently after abandoning them, blissfulness was 
ascertained to be BRAHMA. 

13. If it be asked, how did BHRIGU connect blissfulness 
with the indication of BRAHMA ? The reply is, inasmuch as 
all creatures owe their existence to the gratification of sexual 
appetite, and after bHng born, continue o live by means of 
temporal enjoyments in the shape of food, etc., and in death 
enter into a condition of blissfulness resembling that of 
profound slumber, therefore blissfulness is BRAHMA. 

14. [This is further corroborated by a passing reference 
to the conversation of SANATKUMAR and NARAD ( Vide 
Chhandogya Upanishad, Chap. VIII)]. "Prior to the evolution 
of the elements, and their products, viviparous, oviparous, 
etc., and the threefold entities, knower, knowledge and the 
object to be known, there existed the Supreme Self, unlimited 
by time and place, i.e., infinite." And in Pralaya, they 
knower (internal organ) knowledge (modification of the 
mind) and the object of cognition (jar, etc.,) are absent. 

15. The cognitional sheath is the knower; the mental, 
knowledge; and sound, form, etc., are subjects of cognition. 
They did not exist prior to the evolution of the universe. 
[That is to say, Jiva with his associate of intellect, forming 
the cognitional sheath, derived from the Supreme Self, is the 
knower ; the mental sheath is knowledge ; and sound, form, 
taste, smell and touch are the well-known properties by 
which objects are known all these being products could not 
exist prior to the cause from which they are derived, and 
from that cause the Supreme Self they are not distinct. 

16. Thus, in the absence of the three entities (knower, 
etc.,) the secondless Supreme Self is perfect, [i.e., unlimited 
by time and place,] and this is easy to understand. When is 
He experienced ? In profound unconscious meditation, 
dreamless slumber, and in fainting swoon that Self is 
experienced as secondless. [To a theosophist accustomed to 
practise unconscious meditation, and to the generality of men 


profound slumber and fainting fits are trite examples. For, 
after recovering consciousness, the common experience is 
absence of recollection of what passed in the interim ; and 
that recollection of the total disappearance of phenomena 
proceeds from the abiding Intelligence or consciousness which 
is no other but BRAHMA, the Supreme Self. In the same way, 
in the twilight of creation prior to the evolution of the 
elements and their products as there was nothing to limit, 
It is therefore said to be perfect.] 

17. [If it be contended, BRAHMA may be perfect and 
infinite, but that does not imply supreme felicity ; to clear such 
a misapprehension it is said : What is perfect is full of bliss 
and no happiness is to be found in what is finite and limited 
by the three distinctions of knower, knowledge and the object 
to be known ; therefore, as BRAHMA is secondless, It is full 
of bliss. So spoke SANATKUMAR to NARAD when he came to 
enquire of Self-knowledge to remove his extreme un- 

18. Though NARAD was well read in the Puranas, Vedas 
and the other Shastras, yet was he devoid of Self-knowledge, 
consequently felt very miserable. (Chhandogya Upanishad, 
Chapter VII.) 

19. Previous to his studying the Vedas t he was worried 
with the three varieties of misery personal, accidental and 
elementary, but subsequently in addition to them, the pain 
attending study, and the mortification of forgetfulness, besidei 
censure from one superior in learning, and the feeling of pride 
towards his inferior all these come for his share. 

20. Then he repaired to the sage SANATKUMAR and said. 
" Bhagavan \ I am extremely miserable, do impart me the 
necessary instruction that I may surmount all grief." And the 
sage replied, " Happiness is the only remedy." 

21. Inasmuch as worldly enjoyments are covered with 
thousand miseries, it is proper to regard them as such ; there- 


fore what has already been said about finite substances con 
taining no happiness holds true. 

a*. it be contended, material objects as t hey are finite 
>e devo,d of happiness, but the secondless Reality is also 
.larljr conditioned; if i, were otherwise, one should have 
experienced that felicity, and since such experience is wanting 
1 cannot be present. Then again, ,he admission of its 
penence involves duality, for there must be a knower to 
expenence felicity, and the subject of knowledge. Thus wilt 
Uy be established, agonistic to the secondless, non . 
dull BRAHMA and injurious to It. 

3- [ To this the SiWarf replies.] The secondless is not 

the seat of, but happiness itself. The same cause which 

makes the secondless happiness, prevents it also from bein 

= seat or receptacle. If proofs be wanted, they ,, e nol 

necessary, because BRASMA is self-illuminated. 

24. And regarding the selfmanifestibility of BRAHMA 
Jm.t your words as proof, inasmuch as you confess the 
ssness, but contend only for an absence of felicity. 
If you say, you never intended to admit the second- 
less BKAH.MA, but simply referred to our words, to advance 
ob,ect,ons against them; then say what existed prior to the 
evolution of this vast material expanse ? 

Whether in that prior condition, there existed the 

BRAHMA, or the objective world, or something 

t from both ? Now something different from duality 

d non-duality is inadmissible, for it exists nowhere. Dualitr 

d no, exist prior to the secondless BRAHMA, as that had 

een ushered ,no existence, consequently you are forced 

to fall back upon the secondless. 

If you say, this only establishes the secondless 
taAH analogic..!,-, and not by in f erence . M , 

enquire of you whether you call that to be an argument based 
reason and analogy which is with or wilbout illustration > 
flwe dues not exist a third form. 


28. An argument without inference and example is 
worthless. Therefore in connection with the first variety 
(i. e., with example) adduce an illustration that will be con 
formable to the sacred writings. 

29. If you say, like the imperception of phenomena in 
profound slumber, cyclic periods of destruction are secondless, 
owing to similar imperception ; then the question for you to 
answer is, whether in regard to profound slumber being second- 
less, you refer to your own slumber or that of another person 
for an example. If your own slumber be the example of 
secondlessness, what is the illustration of that slumber ? Do 

30. If the profound slumber of another person be regard 
ed as such example, how grand is your device ? A person who 
knows not his profound slumber can have very little know 
ledge of it in another. 

31. Just as in my own case, I do nothing while sleeping, 
so in the case of another, when he is actionless, that is his 
profound slumber ; if you draw your inference in this way, that 
necessarily amounts to an inferential admission of the self- 
manifestibility of your own profound slumber. 

32. And that self-manifestibility is such a condition 
where no sensory organ can go, and of which there is no 
example, yet it cannot but be admitted. 

33. If you say, let profound slumber be secondless and 
self-manifested, but how can there be any felicity in it? The 
answer is, since there is no misery, you are constrained to 
admit the existence of felicity in profound slumber. 

34. Where is the proof of absence of misery in profound 
slumber? Universal experience and the Sruti alike estab 
lish it. "A blind person forgets his blindness, one pierced 
in the ears forgets that he is so, and a sickman imagines in 
sleep that he is in health." And this is ratified by experience. 

35. If it be contended, absence of misery does not 
amount to happiness, for in stones, etc., misery is absent yet 


there is no happiness. Such a contention is untenable and 
extremely opposed to profound slumber the subject of 

36. Presence of happiness and absence of misery can be 
inferred from the appearance of a person. The usual marks 
by which one or the other, or both, are made out, are too well- 
known, so that the face may properly be regarded as the index 
of what a man has for his share ; but so far as stones are 
concerned, from an absence of the usual signs by which happi 
ness or its reverse can be traced, it is impossible to conclude 
that misery only is wanting in them. 

37. Individual happiness and misery are a matter of 
personal experience, and they cannot be inferentially known ; 
but like their presence known from experience, their absence 
is known too. 

38. Thus then, like the perception of happiness, want of 
misery in profound slumber is likewise established from the 
same source (experience); and for such absence of misery, it 
must be admitted as a condition of uninterrupted felicity. 

39. If that condition of profound slumber were not one 
of felicity, what necessity would there be to undergo trouble 
and expense for making the bed soft, neat and tidy to induce 
sleep ? 

40. If the bedding be looked upon as a means for the 
removal of pain, it is natural to believe its capability of 
producing happiness in a bed-ridden patient by removing his 
pain. And in health in the absence of pain attending illness, 
the necessity for its removal is likewise wanting that bedding 
and the rest are the means of procuring happiness. 

41. But since such happiness of profound slumber is 
accomplished by the usual means bedding, cot, and the rest, 
it must be material. To such a contention, the reply is, 
whether happiness preceding the advent of sleep, or during 
it, is considered material ? The Vedantin inclines to the first 
view, and says happiness felt prior to the advent of sleep may 


be declared material, ie., derived from material resources- 
bedding and posture. 

42. Now for the second query. Happiness attending 
profound slumber is not due to any cause. Then, knowledge 
of the usual means, bedding, etc., is wanting, consequently the 
happiness felt cannot be ascribed to them as its source. But 
it may be argued, if the happiness of profound slumber be not 
material, i.e., uncreate and eternal, why is it not experienced 
like material enjoyment? Because the sleeper who expe 
riences that happiness in sleep, being immersed in happiness, 
it is not perceived like happiness proceeding from material 
enjoyment. Hence it is said, prior to sleep, the intellect of the 
sleeper approaches the felicity produced from bedding, etc., 
and subsequently during slumber, is immersed in exquisite 

43. To be more explicit. Jiva, engaged in work during 
the hours of wakefulness, gets tired, and repairs to his bed 
for sleep ; the fatigue, produced from work, is removed, and 
with the return of mental quiet, brought about by rest, he feels 
the happiness caused by the bedding, etc. 

44. What is the nature of material happiness? Pain 
following an ungratified desire in the shape of material acquisi 
tion (say wealth, etc.,) is experienced by the individual during 
the course of his daily labor, for destroying which he repairs 
to his bed; his intellect is now directed inwards where it meets 
with the reflection of natural felicity [of Self]; and this 
reflection of felicity is material happiness. Here too, after 
experiencing that material happiness, the individual who 
experiences it, as well as his experience and the subject of that 
experience, subject him to work and fatigue. 

45. And for the removal of that labour and fatigue, Jiva 
runs at once into the blissfulness of BRAHMA to be one with 
It. As in the Sruti Pupil ! then (in profound slumber) Jiva 
merges into BRAHMA to be one with It." 

46. Five examples are adduced in the Sruti to illustrate 


the blissfulness of profound slumber, viz., of the eagle, hawk, 
infant, emperor, and Mahabrahmana (an eminent Brahman 
learned in the Shastras). These are : 

47. Just as an eagle, with its leg tied to a string round 
its keeper s wrist, tempted to fly hither and thither at the 
sight of prey, but unable to find any comfortable resting spot 
alights upon the hand where the other end of the string is 
attached : 

48. So is the mind of the individual (his associate), for 
the sake of experiencing the fruit of actions, good and bad, 
war., happiness and misery, engaged between the hours of 
dreaming slumber and wakefulness, and after the consumma 
tion of fructescent works, merges into Ignorance, his formal 
cause. Then with the dissolution of the mind, fiva, a form 
of its associate, becomes the Supreme Self. 

49- Like the hawk tired with flying in the air in quest 
of food, vehemently bending its way towards its nest for the 
sake of rest ; Jiva (reflection of intelligence with the associate 
)f mind) desirous of the blissfulness of Self at once repairs to 
the region of the heart for profound slumber. 

50. Just as an infant, suckling its mother s breast to the 
fill, lying in a soft bed, and having neither any discrimination 
ofT and mine, nor any desire and passion, is the very 
picture of happiness; 

5 - Or like an emperor, satiated with all sorts of human 
enjoyments, feeling himself supremely blessed ; 

52. Or like an eminent Brahman, learned in self- 
knowledge, experiencing happiness after reaching the confines 
of blissfulness derived from knowledge of his oneness with 
BRAHMA ; do all individuals attain the felicity of BRAHMA in 
profound slumber. 

53- But it may be asked, why other examples are excluded, 
and allusion made only to the infant, emperor and an eminent 
Brahman ? Because, the happiness of an infant, emperor and 
a Brahman devoted to BRAHMA is proverbial, while the 


condition of other persons is only miserable. Persons wanting 
in discrimination are apt to conclude the condition of an 
infant to be happy, while those with an ordinary amount 
of discrimination consider a king to be happy ; but the really 
discriminating person knows for certain that happiness 
belongs to him who has cognised Self to be no other than 
BRAHMA ; and the rest are miserable, for they are affected 
with passions and desires which give them no rest. They are, 
therefore, not proper illustrations to explain the felicity of 
profound slumber. 

54. Let infant and the rest be happy, but what connec 
tion is there between them and a person in profound slumber ? 
" Like the happiness of an infant, emperor and a Brahman 
devoted to BRAHMA, a person in profound slumber attains the 
blissfulness of BRAHMA." And " like a fond husband embra 
cing his dearly beloved wife, knowing neither out nor in, but 
experiencing happiness; a person in sleep, having merged into 
BRAHMA, knows neither out nor in, but is transformed into 

55. As the word out in the illustration includes all 
places from cross-ways to the narrowest lane, and in has 
reference to houshold work and and inside the house; so are 
subjects of the waking condition and dreams respectively 
called out and * in. Because dream is the impression of 
objects seen during wakefulness, and manifested inside the 
vessels of the body. 

56. In profound slumber "a father is no more a father/ 
This and similar other Sruti texts, shew that the individual 
loses his ordinary condition, and the usual relation of father 
and son, brother and husband is no more perceived then ; so 
that, there remains the condition of BRAHMA. 

57. The conceit that " I am a father," etc., is the source 
of happiness and misery according as it fares well or ill with 
his relations, but when it is destroyed [and the illusory attru 



bution of Self to not-Self beginning with son to nothing i$ 
removed] a person surmounts all grief. 

58. " Dnring profound slumber when this material 
expanse has disappeared temporarily into its formal cause, 
Ignorance abounding in darkness, the individual for this 
envelopment of ignorance (Prakriti) enjoys felicity." So, 
says the Kaivalya Sruti (Atharva Veda). 

59. And this is alike corroborated by universal experience. 
For a person on rising from sleep exclaims, " I was happy ia 
sleep and knew nothing then." In this manner, the happiness 
felt during sleep and want of knowledge or, ignorance of what 
happened then, is remembered by him. 

60. Since there can be no recollection of substances which 
one has no experience of, it is natural to infer the presence o$ 
experience in connection with the recollection of happiness in; 
profound slumber ; hence it is said, experience of happiness, 
and of ignorance are both present then. If it be contended, 
the mind is in a state of abeyance in sleep, consequently in the 
absence of its instrument, how can experience be possibly 
present ? To such a contention it may be asked, whether the 
instrument of experiencing happiness, or the instrument of, 
ignorance is meant to be absent ? Both of them are untenable. 
Because, happiness is self-manifested intelligence and stands 
in no need of any instrument. And Self who is intelligence, 
is manifested in the form of bliss; and from that self-mani 
fested bliss is discovered ignorance which envelops it. 

61. Nor can it be contended, that the admission of the. 
self-manifested happiness of profound slumber does not neces 
sarily amount to Self being the blissful BRAHMA : for in the 
Bajsancya Upanishad we read " Intelligence is the blissful 
BRAHMA." Therefore that self-manifested happiness is no. 
other but BRAHMA. 

62. Since experience and recollection have invariably 
the same seat, it may be argued that the usual experience o 
a person, on rising from sleep"! was sleeping happily and 


knew nothing then" being remembered by the sleeper (the 
predicate of the word cognitional) he is their experiencer. 
To avoid such a misapprehension, it is said, inasmuch as the 
internal organ (a product of his associated ignorance) merges 
into or disappears in ignorance, Jiva with the associate of the 
internal organ is not the experiencer of happiness or ignorance. 
In other words " I knew nothing then" is an inferential proof 
of the presence of ignorance in profound slumber experienced 
by the sleeper and recollected immediately on his waking ; 
and in the absence of ignorance it is impossible for him to say 
so; then again, as -both the demonstrator or witness of that 
ignorance (the cognitional sheath) and its proof (the mental 
sheath) are so transformed that they abandon their respective 
forms and rest in the shape of the cause-ignorance ; therefore, 
intelligence, associated with the internal organ, can never be 
the instrument which experiences it. Why ? Because sleep is 
said to be the condition A of destruction of both [the cognitional 
and mental sheaths, and that sleep is ignorance. 

63. If it be asked, since the cognitional sheath is literally 
wanting in profound slumber during the time when felicity 
and ignorance are both experienced, how can it be credited 
with the power of remembering them with the return of 
wakefulness ? Just as butter liquifying with heat is restored 
to its original consistence by the action of cold ; so from the 
exhaustion of fructescent works in the hours of wakefulness, 
the internal organ disappears in sleep to be again modified 
into the shape of the internal organ from the force of the 
fructescent during the next waking condition, and thus ap 
pears in the gross condition ; for which self, the associate of 
the internal organ, is also converted into the consistence of 
the cognitional sheath ; and that Self in the first condition of 
profound slumber when his associate has been destroyed is 
called by the name of blissful sheath/ 

64. That is to say, immediately prior to profound slumber 
that modification of intellect which combined with the re- 


flection of happiness, subsequently disappears in sleep in> 
connection with the (reflection of happiness) and is called the 

65. The blissful sheath, a product of the modification of 
intellect with the reflection of happiness directed internally, (an 
associate of ignorance together with its impression) experiences 
the felicity of BRAHMA in profound slumber by means of a 
subtle modification of ignorance combined with the reflection 
of intelligence. 

66. If it be asked, like the expression " I feel happy," 
used by individuals in waking condition, why is not a similar 
conceit present in connection with the profound slumber ? Be 
cause, modification of ignorance is subtle, and of intellect, 
apparent : as declared by persons well-read in the Vedanta. 

67. For authority to prove what has already been said 
about the blissful sheath as the experiencer of the blisslulness 
of BRAHMA by a subtle modification of ignorance, the 
Mandukya and Tapniya Upanishads are cited : " The 
blissful [sheath] is the agent and instrument, and respecting 
the felicity of BRAHMA it is the enjoyer." Self who has as 
sumed one form, or blended with, ordinary intelligence in 
profound slumber is full of bliss ; for he enjoys felicity by 
the modification of reflected intelligence. 

69. To be more explicit. In the waking condition Self 
who is regarded as BRAHMA, (" That art thou/ ) and one with 
the cognitional, vital and mental sheaths ; who has eyes, ears, 
*tc. ; who is earthy, watery, aerial, fiery and etherial, and not; 
full of desire and free from it ; full of anger and without it, 
as cited in the Sruti, is separated from the associates of mind 
and intellect in profound slumber and assumes one form ; 
like flour ground out of a handful of rice where the separate 
form of each grain is lost. 

70. In the waking condition, the mental function assumes 
the modification of a jar to cognise it ; but in sleep the jar is 
no more cognisable ; it is then said to be non-existent as an 


object of cognition, and the mental function or intellect blends 
into intelligence to be one with it: just as drops of rain falling 
from the clouds are solidified into hail-stones. 

71. And this intelligence (in which the mental function 
has blended) is in common parlance said to be the witness 
and free from misery by the Vaisheshikas and others who 
are ignorant of the drift of the Sacred Scriptures for an absence 
of the usual modifications of misery in profound slumber. 

72. For tasting the blissfulness of BRAHMA) in profound 
slumber, intelligence reflected in the modification of ignorance 
is the principal means. But it may be asked, if Jiva enjoy* 
such felicity in sleep why does he abandon it and get up front 
sleep to be a subject of misery produced from his connection 
with home, family and the rest ? Because, bound as he is by 
the chain of actions good and bad, he is constrained to aban 
don that BRAHMAIC felicity after having tasted it as a result 
of good Karma, to wake up for tasting the misery incidental 
to every human being* [as a result of past misdeeds]. 

73. To this effect the Kaibalya Sruti says, " From the effect 
of works of prior births a person reverts from profound slumber 
to dreams and wakefulness." 

74. Even after waking, a person experiences for a short 

* Just as a child leaving its mother s lap is seen to go out 
in company with its playmates, and when tired with play returns 
to the mother to experience felicity ; so is profound slumber th 
house; ignorance (cause -body) mother; its projection, lap; and 
the internal organ with reflection of intelligence projected, or 
evolved out of ignorance, the child, which is engaged in the pro 
vince of wakefulness in play, in company with playmates 
in the form of fructescent works ; and when these k works are 
exhausted during waking hours and dreams, feeling tired retires 
to its mother s lap to experience felicity in profound slumber and 
thus forgets fatigue and toil ; till roused by the call of its com 
panions again to play and stir out of doors in wakefulness and 


time the impression of BRAHMAIC felicity he had been enjoying 
while asleep. How is it known ? Because, without conceiving 
of any subject, the mind remains unoccupied ; and for this 
state of (mental) indifference,* he feels happy. 

75. Controlled by their actions good and bad, all creatures 
are subsequently (while awake) subjected to a variety of grief ; 
and thus forget the blissfulness they had enjoyed for a short 
time while sleeping profoundly. 

76. Therefore, their need be no more contention about the 
presence of felicity in sleep. Each day, both in the beginning 
and termination of sleep, every individual has a partiality for 
it : under such circumstances where is the man of good intel 
lect who will say nay ? In other words, every man has a 
partiality for sleep, both prior to it and at its end ; and as in 
the beginning the usual bed is laid, and after sleep is over, 
he is yet unwilling to part with the felicity he was enjoying, 
for which he remains silent, hence there can be no question 
about it. 

77. If what has just been said about the experience of 
BRAHMAIC felicity after the close of sleep when the individual 
rests in silence and contentment be a fact, where then is the 
necessity for the Sacred Scriptures or instruction from a Guru ? 
As even without them, idle persons will be successful in attain 
ing that felicity. 

78. And the Siddhanti replies : If a person would know 
the felicity of profound slumber to be Self, and no other than 

* A person on rising from sleep experiences neither pleasure 
nor pain ; in short, both happiness and its reverse are then 
absent, for which, it is called the state of indifference. Similarly 
in wakefulness when both happiness and grief are absent, it is 
called indifference. In happiness there arises passion or desire, 
and in grief envy or spite ; therefore, absence of desire and envy 
caused by their respective instrumentshappiness and grief is in 
difference or resting in contentment, 


BRAHMA, his emancipation is certain, inasmuch as that igno 
rance which vvould fix limits and enjoin him to practise sanc 
tioned works will be destroyed ; thus far you are correct. 
But it is impossible to know BRAHMA without the help of the 
Sacred Writings and instruction from a Professor. 

79. Now I knovv BRAHMA from what has fallen from your 
lips; how then can my emancipation be prevented? Just 
as an ignorant person after having heard something from 
another considers himself to be learned [as in the following 
example] : 

80. A rich person once observed in reference to a Pandit, 
who had studied the four Vedas, that he was fit to be rewarded 
with wealth amply ; an ignorant person, present then, hear,, 
ing that the Vedas were four in number, stepped forward 
and exclaimed, " I know the Vedas are four from what you 
have just said, so give rne money too." And you re 
semble him. 

Sf. If it be said, that the ignorant person knew nothing 
pf the Vedas except their number, then inasmuch as your know 
ledge of BRAHMA is imperfect [your emancipation is not 
certain and resemblance with him is complete]. 

82. If you say, since the Vedas have their individual dis 
tinction apart from number, and none whatever between 
Self and BRAHMA, who is impartite bliss ; and there is not a, 
particle of ignorance left in you about this knowledge; the 
illustration which [ have adduced is not an apt one; nor can 
your knowledge be imperfect inasmuch as in respect to the 
impartite blissfulness of BRAHMA (which is devoid of illusion, 
ajid its product) neither imperfection nor its reverse is 
possible : 

83. May I then enquire of you, whether you understand 
the signification of the words impartite, etc., or simply rea^ 
them ? If you read them without comprehending their mean- 
}ng, your knowledge is necessarily imperfect. 

84. Even if you, understand what they signify from, the 


help of grammar, etc., there yet remains the visible know 
ledge of BRAHMA to be acquired ; thus your imperfection is a 
fact, and it cannot be gainsaid. Till you know that you have 
nothing proper to do, nor any desired object to acquire, your 
knowledge of BRAHMA is imperfect. 

85. Know then, whenever any happines is felt apart from 
any subject, it is the impression BRAHMAIC felicity. 

86. And when after the acquisition of an object, desire 
ior it having ceased, the mental function directed internally 
receives the reflection of felicity from self, it is called (ViSHA- 
YANANDA) Material felicity. 

87. [Excepting the three varieties of felicity, viz., of BRAHMA, 
impression and reflection, there is not a fourth variety present 
in the world. The felicity discovered in profound slumber, 
and which is self-manifested is called BRAHMAIC felicity ; 
whatever happiness is experienced in the condition of indiffer 
ence immediately after rising from sleep, is independent of 
any subject of cognition, for which it receives the name of 
impressional felicity (VASANANANDA) ; because, the mind has 
not been thoroughly roused into its normal activity so as to 
pervade any subject. And that happiness which proceeds from 
the acquisition of a desired object, from the reflection of the 

* With the acquisition of a desired object, active quality of 
the mental function, which had produced desire, ceases ; and from 
its good quality following the knowledge of acquisition is mani 
fested the felicity inherent in intelligence associated with the 
(desired) object. Now this modification of the mental function 
has been produced from the object desired, consequently it is. 
called VISHAYANANDA. Or knowledge of the desired object re 
moves the modifications of desire ; and with its removal, other 
modifications directed internally arise, by which felicity asso 
ciated with the internal organ is discovered ; and this internally 
directed modification, or the reflection of felicity in it, is known 
severally as material happines, reflected happiness/ and little 


felicity of Self on the mind directed internally is called re 
flected happiness, or as it is otherwise known, temporal or 
material ( Vishayananda). These are the three forms of 
happiness universally felt; beyond them no other variety is 
recognised. But here it may be contended, that in a previous 
portion of the present treatise (vide VII. ante) the second 
finds no mention and Vidyananda felicity produced from Self- 
knowledge substituted tor it, so that we have an antagonism. 
Moreover, further on will occur passages like these : "from the 
force of practice as a person forgets its individuality or sense 
of Self (egoism), a proportionate keenness of perception will 
be developed to enable him to infer his own happiness." 
"Similarly during the state of indifference he avoids all impres 
sions of happiness ;" so that we have two more varieties added 
to the tripartite classification given here. Then again Atma- 
nanda, Yogananda, and Adwaitananda are also mentioned, 
and the first and the last have each a section devoted to them. 
Thus we have here three distinct forms of happiness and 
to say, that beyond the three with which the text opens there 
is not a fourth variety is clearly inconsistent ; therefore the 
subject requires a passing consideration. It would appear 
subsequently (Sect. XIV. v. 2), that like reflex happiness or 
better still, enjoyment of felicity produced in connection with 
material objects, happiness proceeding from self-knowledge is 
only a modification of the intellect, and the two are not distinct 
from each other. In the same way, for an absence of distinc 
tion between own happiness, principal happiness/ self-happi 
ness/ happiness following mental restraint/ secondless bliss- 
fulness/ and BRAHMAIC felicity, the apparent antagonism is 
cleared away. That is to say, the threefold classification 
mentioned here embraces all other varieties of happiness else 
where cited. This is more clearly established in the following 
wise : "As forgetfulness of egoism or individuality" follows as 
a result of the practice of Yoga, the Yogi experiences the 
felicity peculiar to such mental restraint and which is no other 


but his own happiness. "Where no phenomena are mani 
fested, where there is no sleep even, the happiness present in 
that condition of mental restraint (1 ogd) is the BRAHMAIC 
felicity" as KRISHNA spoke to ARJUNA. Now this BRAHMAIC 
felicity is not distinct from own happiness ; so is principal 
happiness one with felicity of BRAHMA; because as the source 
of reflex and impressional happiness, BRAHMAIC felicity 
remains self-manifested. Similarly the blissfulness of Self, 
and the secondless blissfulness are all forms of BRAHMAIC 

88. Of the aforesaid three forms, that which is self- 
manifested, and gives rise to material and impressional happi 
ness is fit to be known as the blissfulness of BRAHMA. 

89. Having established the blissfulness of profound slumber 
to be the self-illuminated intelligence of BRAHMA, by the help 
of Sruti texts, logical conclusion and experience, listen to the 
means of recognising that felicity of BRAHMA in that other 
condition of wakefulness. [In the Sruti occurs the passage 
" During sleep when this vast material expanse disappears into 
its formal cause ignorance, the individual experiences bliss by 
the envelopment of ignorance." " I was then sleeping happily " 
is an illustration of recollection of happiness which the sleeper 
exclaims immediately on getting up; had there been no happi 
ness he could not have said so, thus leading to the only logical 
conclusion of the presence of happiness; and as the mental 
function is in abeyance then, consequently it could not take 
cognition of that happiness, for which it is said to be self- 

90. The sime felicity which receives the name of, BRAH- 
MANANDA in profound slumber, is called the cognitional 
sheath in connection with the dreaming and waking states. A 
difference in seat produces a difference in name. 

91. Wakefulness has its seat in the eyes ; dreams, throat ; 
tnd profound slumber, the lotus of the heart, But eyes here 


indicate the whole body ; for during wakefulness the whole 
body from head to foot is prevaded by intelligence. 

92. And like an ignited ball of iron [in which the fire and 
iron though distinct appear one] that intelligence is from 
illusion, recognised one with the physical body, and used so. 
As " I am a man." 

93. "I am indifferent to pleasure and pain;" * ( I am 
happy ;" " I am miserable ;" these are the three conditions 
experienced by humanity. Of them happiness and misery are 
a result of good and bad works, while indifference proceeds 
naturally ; [inasmuch as Self is neither an agent nor doer of 
works, so that they cannot affect him]. 

94. Happiness and misery are of two different sorts as 
they are produced either from external objects of senses or 
internal (mental) enjoyment; and the intervals between hap 
piness and misery when the mind rests in contentment re 
present the state of indifference. 

95. When a person exclaims " Now I have no anxiety and 
care, but am happy," he expresses the natural blissfulness of 
Self during the state of indifference; so that even in wakeful- 
ness there is manifestation of own happiness ; and it is proper 
that one should know this. 

96. But for the presence of a subtle form of egoism in 
the happiness discovered in the condition of indifference, it is 
not the principal felicity of Self, but only its impression. 

97. Now for an example as to the difference between 
principal happiness and its impression. As the sensation of 
cold communicated to the hand by the contact of a jar rilled 
with water is not water, but its quality, from which the presence 
of water is inferred : 

98. So, from repeated practice as egoism is forgotten, 
wise persons with keen preception infer own happiness. 

99. After the mental function has ceased to take cognition 
of things which are not-Self, and become moulded in the shape 


of BRAHMA, so that Self appears one with It ; then from repeat 
ed (skilful) practice of profound meditation, the individual 
forgets egotism and tastes the supreme bliss. But this does 
not signify that sleep is such a subtle condition of egoism. 
Because though the senses cease to carry on their respective 
functions there is no want of mind in sleep ; and because 
profound sleep is said to be the resting of the intellect in its 
cause, ignorance. The presence of mind in sleep is proved 
by the body not falling to the ground. That is to say, when 
in profound slumber egoism disappears, the body of the sleep 
er is seen to fall to the ground, but here it does not; conse 
quently there is no dissolution of egoism, but it rests in the 
form of the internal organ. 

100. "Whatever happiness is felt during profound uncon 
scious meditation, when there is neither knower, knowledge 
nor the object to be known, and which is not sleep too, it 
is the BRAHMAIC felicity," So spoke KRISHNA to ARJUNA. (Gita, 
Chap. VI). 

IOT. [The Gita text is now being set forth : ] 
"The person of tranquil intellect, gradually restrains the 
mind by resting it on Self* and abandoning other thoughts." 

102. Mind is naturally unsteady and fickle, and liable 
to be acted upon by the usual objects of cognition through 
their individual senses; and when it has discovered their 
unreality, it is finally led by those objects themselves to show 
an utter disregard for, or indifference to them; thus impeded 
or restrained it becomes subservient to Self, tries adequate 
means to fix all thoughts exclusively on him, leaving every 
thing else. In this manner, a Yogi through the force of 
practice comes to rest his mind tranquilly on Self. 

103. A Yogi free from sin and fascination, and with the 

* Resting on Self is to fix ihe mind on the grand trutfi "All 
this is indeed Self, and beyond him there is nothing." 


mind tranquilized, knows to a certainty " Indeed all this is 
[BRAHMA;" and experiences undecaying and pure bliss. 

104. When from constant practice of Yoga, the mind 
has been restrained so as not to be led away by sensuous 
objects; and from profound meditation the internal organ has 
been rendered pure, the Yogi sees Self as intelligence and 
feels contentment in him not in external objects. 

105. While resting on Self, he experiences infinite happi 
nesshappiness capable of being grasped by the intellect, 
though supersensuous [/, e., independent of any subject of 
cognition by the senses] ; so thai the internal organ never 
leaves Self to pervade any tKing else. 

106. Thus having acquired visible knowledge of Self, 
he disregards all other acquisitions as inferior ; and with the 
internal organ firmly seated on Self even the pangs of death 
are unable either to disaffect or move his mind so as to leave 

107. Know it to be a form of pain-destroying Yoga. [In 
short, whatever mention has been made of the particular con 
ditions of Self (beginning with v. 101). come under the cate 
gory of Yoga ; know it by the indication of painlessness, or 
properties antagonistic to pain]. And that Yoga it is proper 
to practise with a mind free from pain. 

108. A Yogi freed from the obstacles which attend the 
practice of Yoga, always seeks for Self, and knowing his one 
ness with BRAHMA experiences ineffable and supreme bliss. 

109. Just as sea water removed drop by drop by means 
of a straw* may ultimately lead to its being dried [in an im- 

* A bird of the species Parra jacana deposited her eggs on 
the sea coast, but they were washed away by the waves, causing 
much annoyance to her. She resolved to run it dry, and took 
hold of a bit of straw by which she commenced operating, remov 
ing each time a few drops ; other birds saw the hopeless task she 


mensc distance of time] ; so does the practice of Yoga unat 
tended with pain produce mental restraint in a subsequent 
period of time. 

no. Nor is the Gita alone in mentioning it, foe in the 
Maitrayniya sakha of the Yayur Veda, the sage SHAKAYANYA in 
his discourse with BRIHADRATH speaks of BRAHMAIC felicity in 
connection with profound meditation. 

in. Just as fire deprived of fuel subsides into its cause 
heat [and its characteristic glowing ceases] ; so from the ex 
haustion of its modifications, the internal organ subsides into 
its cause. [That is to say, when from the practice of profound 
meditation the internal organ has been thoroughly restrained, 
and eased of its natural fickleness modifications of its active 
quality it rests in its cause the good quality, which alone 

112. To one desirous of finding out Self, and who for that 
purpose has reduced his mind to its cause, and subjugated the 
senses, so as not to allow them being turned away by sensuous 
objects, happiness produced as a result of his good karma ap 
pears unreal for it is material. 

113. Virtually mind itself is this material world, and every 
endeavour should be made use of to render it faultless [by the 
several means discrimination, indifference and the rest]. For 

was bent in carrying out, tried to dissuade her, but in vain. At 
length they too were moved to join her ; this novel spectacle affect 
ed NARADA, who sent Garuda to their help. This produced the 
desired result ; the sea was made to restore the missing eggs. 
What is meant here to be conveyed is that like the bird engaged 
in its self-imposed task entailing immense labor and time, steadily 
bent after it, feeling neither pain nor getting disheartened till 
relieved by the assistance of Garuda ; a person bent in restraining 
his mind receives the kind assistance of ISWARA, and his ultimate 
success is certain. 


it is a golden truth, that results follow according to the nat ea 
of the mind (subject thought of).* 

114. Earnestness of the mind destroys both good and bad 
works as mentioned in the Sruti and Smriti, " As fire des 
troys in a blaze the filaments of cotton which crown the tops of 
certain reeds, so does knowledge, all de-merit." " All sins are 
removed by meditating on BRAHMA in the fourth quarter of 
night." A person with contentment of mind sees BRAHMA in 
Self and exclaims, " That am I ;" and experiences ineffable 

115. Just as in ordinary persons wanting in self-knowledge, 
the mind is apt to be drawn away by sensuous objects ; if a like 
attachment to BRAHMA would take place, where is the individual 
that would not be freed from consecutive re-births ? 

116. Mind is either pure or impure; these are its two 
varieties. Impurity results from passions and desires, and 
purity, in their exclusion. 

117. Mind is the cause of metempsychosis and emanci 
pation. Attachment to material objects (temporal enjoyments) 
is the source of bondage, as its reverse, emancipation. 

118. That happiness which results from the practice of 
profound meditation, when the mind cured of its blemishes 
and throughly restrained, firmly rests in Self is so uncommon 
that it is impossible to be described, but capable of being 
realized by the mind. 

119. Though profound meditation cannot last infinitely 
yet during its stay for short periods (of which there is no im 
possibility) the felicity of Self is ascertained. 

* Just as pure water appears colored blue from the color 
present in its associate ; so is the mind a product of the good 
quality of the five elements converted into the shape of the object 
thought of ; therefore when a person is constantly thinking that he 
is Jiva, his mind is modified, accordingly ; similarly, " I am 
ISWARA" results from the thought of non -difference between Seif 
and BRAHMA, And the results are different too. 


120. The reason why a person of faith, bent after the 
practice of profound meditation, always experiences that feli 
city of BRAHMA, is because after having once ascertained it 
[while in his meditation] he is led to believe in its continued 
presence at other times too when he rises from his medita 

iai. So does he, during the condition of indifference dis* 
carding all impressions of felicity, contemplate on the primary 
or chief blissfulness of Self. 

122. Just as a profligate woman, even in the midst of her 
household work, mentally dwells on the pleasure experienced 
in company with her lover : 

123. Does a man of faith, with tranquil mind, believing in 
the Reality of Self, internally taste the supreme felicity of 
BRAHMA, even in the midst of the usual practices [eating, etc.,]. 

124. Tranquil mind, is thus explained : 

To turn the senses away from their several subjects and to 
restrain them with a predominating desire of finding out the 
natural felicity of Self. 

125. Like a person carrying a heavy load on his head, 
finding rest by easing himself of [and depositing it on the 
ground], one, who has discarded the world and cut off all con 
nections with it and its goods, exclaims " Now I am at rest." 
Such a modification of the intellect is expressed by the afore 
said word faith/ 

126. Just as a person who has found out rest in the 
manner above explained is bent after the enjoyment of that 
one and primary blissfnlness of Self during the condition of 
indifference ; so does he diligently attend to it, even in the 
midst of happiness and misery which follows as a result of his 
fructescent works. 

127. Just as one bent after immediate self-destruction 
in fire, considers dress and ornaments which cause delay in 
carrying it out as his enemy ; so does a person of discrimina- 


tion in quest of self-knowledge consider temporal enjoyments 
inimical to him, and find them all faulty. 

128. But in respect to those other enjoyments not inimi 
cal to Self, and the exquisite felicity naturally belonging to 
him, he is found to take hold of them by his intellect one 
after another ; just as the crow uses its eyes. 

129. That is to say, as the sight of a crow is influenced 
by one eye at a time, so that when the left eye sees, the right 
does not, and vice versa ; similarly does the intellect of a man 
of discrimination take hold of one set of enjoyments ; for 
which it is said to come and go between them, one after 

130. A knower of Self enjoying such happiness proceed 
ing from material objects not inimical to him, and the felicity 
of BRAHMA ascertainable by means of the utterances of the 
Upanishads, knows both of them, as much, as are they known 
by persons acquainted with the popular and Vedic languages. 

131. The same cause which enables a man of discrimi 
nation to experience or know both material and BRAHMAIC 
felicities, prevents him from being affected with any misery 
that may fall to his share as a result of fructescent works sub 
sequent to knowledge, as he used to be, ere gnosis had arisen. 
In short, even in the midst of misery his perception of the 
blissfulness of Self remains unimpeded, just as by immersing 
half the body in water one feels both cold and hot at the 
same time. 

132. As in wakefulness, he experiences that BRAHMAIC 
felicity constantly, so in dreams too it is ever present : for 
dreams are a product of impression of objects seen while 

133. Impression of ignorance is also a source of dream ; 
hence in common with the ignorant, a theosophist experiences 
both happiness and misery in dream a product of the im 
pression of ignorance. 



To sum up then : 

The present treatise Yogananda forms the first chapter 
of BRAHMANANDA ; it deals on the discovery of the blissfulness 
of Self as experienced by a Yogi, for which it is called the 
blissfulness of mental restraint/ 


(b). Atmananda, or The Blissfulness of Self. 

HAVING in the previous section described the experience of 
felicity by a person of discrimination following mental res 
traint; this one will deal with the blissfulness of Self as 
cognised by an enquirer of self-knowledge with dull intellect, 
through the consideration of the word Thou. With this 
purpose the author now begins with an explanation of the 
query set by his pupil : Let those who practise Foga, 
experience the blissfulness of Self as something over and 
above the impressional and BRAHMAIC felicities, but how would 
it fare with persons of dull intellect ? 

2. And the Guru replies : 

Persons of dull intellect are not qualified for self-know 
ledge. From the force of good and bad works they inherit 
bodies according to their deserts, to die and be born over 
and over. Hence there is no necessity for ascertaining what 
becomes of them. 

3. If it be said, kindness of a professor to all creatures 
is proverbial, and that actuates him to impart the necessary 
instruction to those seeking for knowledge, hence there is 
already a necessity. [The professor now enquires:] Say 
then, whether that person of dull intellect is an enquier of 
self-knowledge or averse to it ? 

4. If he is averse to enquire after self-knowledge, he 
should practise adequate works and worship ; [one desirous 
of obtaining the abode of Brahmd should have recourse to 
worship ; and works are necessary for him who desires the 
abode of heaven]. If he is an enquirer, with intellect dull, 
he should be instructed by the door of self-blissfulness i* 
short, by the consideration that his individual blissfulness is 
no other but BRAHMA : 


5. As set forth by YAJNAVALKYA in his discourse with his 
wife MAITREYI. " Know my dear, that husband is not dear for 
the sake of husband s enjoyment ;" but because he contri 
butes to the happiness of the wife. 

6. Husband, wife, wealth, horse and cattle, Brahmana, 
Kshetriya ; the several abodes heaven, etc.; Deva, Vedas, and 
the elements earth and the rest ; in short all objects of enjoy 
ment are dear because they are beneficial to Self. 

7. When a wife is desirous of her ;husband, she loves 
him ; and when he is hungry, or otherwise employed, or con 
fined in bed with sickness, he desires her not. 

8. Therefore it is evident, that the love which a wife 
bears to her husband is not for his sake, but for her self- 
gratification ; in the same way does the husband express his 
fondness for her only for the gratification of his desire and 
not for her sake. 

9. But it may be contended, let their individual desire be 
the incentive for one liking the other, how is it possible for 
both of them being actuated by the same desire at one time ? 
Surely if self-gratification were concerned in it, that would 
render such desire being present in one and absent in the 
other. To this the reply is, both are actuated by the grati 
fication of their individual desires. 

10. For example, a child kissed by the father cries with 
pain caused by the beard pressing against its cheek ; yet 
instead of desisting he continues his kisses not for gratifying 
the child but for his own sake. 

11. Gems and wealth have no desire of their own, yet a 
person protects them with care and affection, not for their 
sake, but for his own benefit. 

12. Bullocks and other beasts of burden are never 
desirous of carrying any burden, )et they are so used by 
traders. Here the subject of affection for carrying weight is 
the tradesman s and not the beast s. 


13. " I am a Brahmana, and qualified to worship." 
Whatever contentment follows from worship done with a 
motive of reward, can only be felt by a Brahmana who has 
the above conceit for his caste but caste (which is insentient) 
can never have any such experience of contentment. 

14. "I am a Kshetriya and that is why I am a ruler." 
Here the happiness is felt by the king and it properly belongs 
.to him ; but the. insentient (warrior) caste is no more a king ; 
nor does it feel any pleasure naturally connected with that 
<high position. The same holds true with Vaishya and other 

15. Desire of obtaining the blissful abode of heaven, 
Brahma, etc., does not cause any benefit to the several abodes 
themselves; but to the individual who has recourse to 
adequate works and worship for inheriting them. 

;i6. SIVA, VistfNU and the other Devas are worshipped 
for the .destruction of sin ; that worship procure them no 
benefit, for they are sinless; but to the worshipper, it is 

17. Neglect of studying the Vedas on the part of a 
Brahmana is very injurious as it reduces him to the level of 
the " fallen ;" but does not affect the Vedas, and it does not 
matter whether they are read or not ; only those qualified to 
study will incur de-merit, and be reduced to the condition of 
one who has lost caste from neglect of the initiatory 

j8. Moreover, all persons are desirous of obtaining a 
place of rest, of quenching thirst, preparing food, drying 
clothes, etc., thus shewing a necessity for the elements earth, 
water, fire, etc., wherewith to gratify their desires ; but they 
(elements) have no such desire. 

19. Master and servant, have each his desire of benefi 
ting self; just as the servant serves his master for the sake 
of gold which goes to benefit him, so is the master benefited 
by the services of the servant. 


20. So many illustrations have been adduced with the 
purpose of enquiring into the applicability of the rule that 
everywhere, in all our practices (eating, etc.), for this love of 
Self, every thing is dear to us ; and the mind should be 
properly impressed with it. 

21 22. If it be contended, affection for all substances 
as they are conducive to the benefit of Self does not 
necessarily constitute affection for him ; because there are 
four varieties of it, and this one is distinct from them. 
Therefore a dissenter asks of what sort is that affection for 
Self spoken of in the Srutt? Whether it is in the form of 
passion, faith, devotion or desire ? Of them passion would 
only be applicable to wife, etc. ; faith for sacrificial works ; 
devotion would have Guru, Deva, etc., for its subject ; and 
desire for a thing which one has not got already. Thus 
then, affection cannot possibly include all conformable things, 
and make them its subject. To this the Siddhanti replies : 
Let the modification of the good quality of the internal organ- 
which follows happiness only, be called affection then. 

23. That [does not necessarily convert affection into- 
desire ; for desire at first pervades the subject of happiness 
which we have not got, whereas affection has for its subject 
both the got and ungot varieties of happiness, inasmuch as 
in happiness already present, and when it has been destroyed, 
there is never wanting affection for Self. This then is the 
difference between affection and desire. Just as food and 
drink are dear, for they are associated with and are means of 
happiness; so for Self being dear, will like them, be a means 
of happiness? 

24. [If then] like food and drink for being dear, Self 
be regarded as an adequate means of happiness who would 
be the enjoyer? Regarding food and drink, the substances 
of enjoyment are the associate for which they are said to 
produce happiness; but in respect to Self there is no associate 
in the shape of enjoyable substances, consequently no means 


of happiness too. With this purpose the Siddhanti asks his 
opponent, if for Self being dear, he be the means of happi 
ness, who will be the subject of that affection in short the 
enjoyer ? No one ; because apart from Self there is no en- 
joyer. If it be said, for his being dear, Self is fit to be a 
subject of affection ; then the reply is, to regard the same sub 
ject both as action and actor simultaneously implies the pre 
sence of properties opposed to each other, hence it is absurd 
to hold Self as both the subject of benefit as well as the bene- 
fiter at the same time. 

25. There can only be affection for happiness derived 
from temporal enjoyments such as wealth, wife, children and 
the rest, and not its excess. Self is exceedingly dear, hence 
love of .Self is infinitely superior to it. Then again, material 
happiness is apt to change its site, sometimes pervading one 
set of objects, which no sooner got possession of, than hun 
gering for others, it does not remain fixed as a rule, which 
affection for Self never does ; therefore love of Self is said to 
be superior to all. 

26. Abandoning one variety of temporal (material) happi 
ness, men are always found bent after the enjoyment of an 
other; but Self is neither capable of being abandoned nor is 
he acceptable, hence Self-love cannot be said to change. 

27. Nor can it be said, Self is fit to be disregarded like a 
bit of straw ; inasmuch as he is not a subject of either being 
abandoned or accepted. Because he* who is to disregard Self 
is one with him k 

28. If it be contended, that the assertion " Self is not a 
subject of being abandoned" does not hold true ; for in illness 
and anger men are found to express a desire of death, so that 

* Jiva is reflection of intelligence ; his individual self is indes 
tructible intelligence, which is naturally one with him, for which 
he cannot disregard Self as something distinct and separate like 
bit of straw. 


from hatred, Self is abandoned. The reply is, (hat desfre 
caused by hatred has for its subject the gross physical body, 
different from self and the wish to die can only affect it, 
but not Self who is indestructible. 

29. The physical body which is parted company with at 
death is not Self; but its relinquisher different from it 
\_Jiva\ is; and as there can be no hatred regarding the relin 
quisher, there is therefore no abandonment of self-love in the 
desire of death. 

30. Thus having established the truth of the Stuti texts 
regarding YAJNAVALKA S address to his wife MAITREYI commen 
cing with, " the husband is not dear to the wife for his desire" 
and ending in "for the gratification of self-desire all are dear 
to him," the subject is further illustrated by argument. 
Husband, wife and the rest, in short all the materials of happi 
ness, inasmuch as they contribute to the welfare of Self are 
held dear. As the son is dearer to the father than the son s 
friend; so for their relation with him, all subjects of affection 
are extremely dear to self.* 

* To a theosophist, self is very dear for his being eternal 
bliss ; but with the common herd, the rule is otherwise ; ignorant 
of his natural blissfulness, they are deluded to hunt after temporal 
enjoyment, which receiving reflection of happiness from him, 
tempts them to the belief that it is supreme felicity; and to regard 
with affection the internal organ, which receives that reflection of 
happiness, the senses situated close to it, and the vital airs, as 
they are directly related to Self. Now the physical body is 
incapable of receiving the reflex happiness, so that it has no direct 
relation with Self : on the contrary, there is a second-hand, in 
direct or mediate relation between him and the physical 1 body, 
through the subtle body which is immediately connected with him 
on the one hand and the physical body on the other. Similarly 
son, wife, etc., are connected by means of the physical body, as 
their friends are by them ; so that the comparative scale of affection 
proceeds at a progressive ratio of increment in the proportion of 
the connection of a thing with Self: that is to say, ScW is the 


31. On appealing to universal experience it is found that 
the wish to be always, is the predominating idea uppermost in 
humanity, and its reverse not to be is nowhere prevalent. 
For instance, "may I live always in happiness, etc." So that 
here also extreme self-love is manifested. 

32. In spite of the authority of the Sruti, argument and 
experience, there are many who from ignorance, or incapa 
bility of comprehending Sruti texts regard Self as subordi 
nate and inferior to son, wife, etc. : 

33. And cite as their authority the text of the Aiterya 
Upanishad where it occurs " Self is born as son," So that 
here son is spoken of as the principal Self:- 

center, thmgs closely connected are more loved than those 
situated at a distance and connected through the second-hand 
instrument of another ; this is why a son is more loved and held 
dearer than his friend, whose connection is only second-hand 
through the connection of the son. But it may be asked since 
Self is all-pervading and naturally blissful, consequently we 
should expect an equal amount of affection everywhere, and 
neither excess nor its reverse, as is here pointed out. The reply 
is very simple ; it has already been said, that the internal organ 
receives the reflection of his felicity, because it is transparent ; or 
what amounts to the same thing, from a preponderance of the 
pure good quality. A jar is insentient, it abounds in darkness, 
consequently it cannot receive that reflex happiness, hence it is not 
dearly loved. Upon the capability of receiving this reflex happi 
ness from Self depends the direct relation of a substance with 
him ; and that relative who is beneficial or conformable to the 
internal organ with its reflection of intelligence is said to have an 
affection for substances ; and on the difference of its associate in 
the proportion of its conformableness or its reverse, depends the 
proportion of excess or diminution of affection. All this refers 
to the ignorant ; but to a theosophist who is devoid of the 
distinctions created by knower, knowledge and the object to be 
known, in short who regards him as unassociated, perfect bliss, 
there is neither diminution nor excess ; he sees Self as the center 
of affection and full of felicity, equally present everywhere. 


34. Which means that the Self in the shape of son acts 
as the substitute of the father, for performing meritorious 
works, and subsequently in dotage, that other Self (the father s) 
considering himself benefited by the good deeds done by 
the son, dies to reap their results ; and believes himself to 
have achieved success in all that was necessary to be done. 

35. Of that inferiority of self to son, wife, etc., passages 
abound in the Purans too. For example. " One without a 
son has no abode hereafter." Since son is the primary self 
a son-less father (though) having his own Self) has no future 
abode to inherit after death. Then again the Sru/i says : 
" Learned men speak of a son instructed in the Vedas as 
beneficial to his father s hereafter." 

36. Human happiness is capable of being reaped by son 
only and not by any other means. To a father without son, 
the usual means, wealth, etc., are a source of creating indif 
ference. A son educated in the Vedas is said to be the 
means of procuring a future abode for his father. " Thou art 
BRAHMA" and similiar other sacred texts are pronounced by a 
dying father to instruct his son. 

37. Now this inferiority of self to son, etc., does not rest 
entirely on the Sruti and other proofs but likewise on popular 
practice where this superiority is equally admitted. 

38. [For on referring to it we find], a father facing death, 
and undergoing privations to acquire wealth, that his wife and 
son may live, (after his death) in happiness, and be free from 
misery. Thus son and wife are superior ; otherwise he would 
not be so mindrul of their happiness at the cost of so much 
hardship and labour to self. 

39. The Siddhanti admits the truth of the Sruti assertion 
about the superiority of son to Self and confirmed by popular 
practice too. He says : Yes what you say about this superi 
ority is true. If it be apprehended, this admission will create 
discord with those other passages where the superiority of 
Self (as witness) has been maintained, then the reply is, that 


does not necessarily reduce Self into a subordinate position 
inferior to son and the rest. On the other hand, to establish 
the superiority or primary importance of a subject practU 
cally used as self three varieties of Atma are spoken of, viz.> 
secondary with the modification of quality ; unreal ; and 

40. As for instance "DEVADATTA SIN HA." Here the first 
word is the name of a person, and the last stands for lion a 
beast of prey; but for the presence of the attributes of the 
latter in the person called DEVADATTA, they are attributed to 
him, and the two are non-distinct ; similarly Self and son are 
naturally distinct (like DEVADATTA and lion) but for the attribu 
tion of Self to son they are regarded one and non-distinct ; 
for a like modification of quality as in the instance under 
illustration, the identity of self with son is called Gouna* or 

41. Just as the stump of a tree taken for a thief, cannot 
possibly be a thief for the distinction between a tree and a thief, 
and it is unreal ; so for the distinction between the five sheaths 
and the witnessing intelligence, (Self), the attribution of Self to 
them is unreal. 

* Words are capable of being understood either by the primary 
force inherent in them which is the principal modification, or from 
the force of indication, from the perquisites of quality. Now this 
qualitative signification is called Gcuni Britti, for instance 
"DEVADATTA SINHA." Here for the presence of braveiy etc., which 
are characteristic of the lion, to call the person DEVADATTA lion 
signifies that he is brave. Similarly in regard to Self, whose literal 
signification is witness, that witness is the principal Self ; but in 
the attribution of unreal qualities to Self, for instance that he is 
the doer of works for present or future benefit depends his 
connection with son, etc., which cannot literally signify Self hence 
the signification of son, and the rest as Self (for this modification 
of quality) is called the secondary Self or Self with quality. 


42. No distinction is seen between the witness (Self), and 
other things, as manifested in respect to the secondary Self 
(son, etc.,); nor is there any difference like the unreal Self (the 
physical body) ; because there does not exist any thing different 
from him. And as he is internal to them all, he is necessarily 
the primary or real self. 

43. For this threefold difference, each individual takes 
that to be his primary self which he has learnt from practice. 
That is to say, ordinary persons devoid of self-knowledge 
follow the usual practice, connecting wife, son, body, etc., with 
Self and believe them to be real ; but a theosophist regards 
every thing else to be unreal, save BRAHMA, the witness. Thus 
for a difference in practice, .whether it be popular, Vedic or 
that of a theosophist, either son, wife, etc., or the physical 
body, or the witness is regarded as the principal self. 

44. [Accordingly we find] in the case of a person in 
death.bed, his son, wife, etc., appear as the proper parties to 
look after the house and property and they are his secondary 
self; because they are desirous of surviving him : but neither 
the witness (real Self) nor the physical body (unreal Self) are 
fit for such work, inasmuch as the former is unchangeable, and 
have no desire, while the latter in confronting death is reduced 
to helplessness ; consequently son and the rest appear as the 
principal self. 

45- For example :" This reader is fire." Here if the 
literal acceptation of fire be taken, the sentence loses its mean 
ing ; because fire is neither capable of reading nor of pro 
nouncing, and one who can read is the fit person, therefore it 
would signify, " Boys reading." And this is meant. 

46. Similarly, in the ordinary phrase " I have been re. 
duced in flesh and it is necessary that I shall be stout in 
body," the connection of self with the physical body (their 
identity) is proper; but for the purpose of regaining flesh it is 
not necessary that the son should be fed with good food, etc.; 
hence body is the principal self. 


4?. " I will practise religious observances to obtain the 
blissful abode of heaven ;" here the agent is the cognitional 
sheath and it is fit to be regarded as self, but not the physical 
body. For all desire of material enjoyments are abandoned 
[which are gratifying to the physical body] and recourse had 
to the practice of rigid austerities enjoined by religion for 
benifitiag the cognitional sheath in the shape of the desired 
abode in heaven. 

48. " I am bound and will try to be freed." [When a 
person possessed of the four means of knowledge is desirous 
of release, then by the help of the preceptor and the sacred 
writings as to the signification of the transcendental phrase 
" That art Thou," he obtains visible knowledge of his oneness 
with BRAHMA, discards the idea of his being an agent and in 
strument, and exclaims " I am BRAHMA."] Here it is proper to 
connect the witness with pure Intelligence and not the cogni 
tional and other sheaths. In the Sruti, Self is spoken of as 
BRAHMA thus : " BRAHMA is knowledge and bliss." " Self is 
infinite, internal, perfect, and full of knowledge." 

49. Just as Brahmanas are qualified to perform the sacri 
ficial ceremony known by the name of Vrihaspati, which no 
Kshctriya nor Vaishya can ; a king, the installation ceremony 
(Ra/suya); and Vaishya, the sacrifice called Vaishyastom, 
which no other casteman can ; so in respect to the secondary, 
unreal and primary selves, each has adequate superiority in bis 
own sphere when used properly. 

50. [To be more explicit] : 

In uses adequate to and proper for Self there is excessive 
love; in substances which are not-self but beneficial to him 
there is only affection ; and those other things which are 
neither Self nor beneficial to him have neither love nor its 
excess (both are wanting) in them.* 

* Things which are subjects of desire are called conformable. 
Happiness, and want of misery, and their means are objects 


51. And those things are divisible into two varieties ac 
cording as they are either objects of disregard or of hate. For 
instance, straw and rubbish deposited on the roadside come 
under the first variety ; while tiger and other ferocious animals 
inasmuch as they cause injury are objects fit to be hated. 
These are the four sorts of things, to wit : 

52. Self (the dearest), things beneficial (dear), worthless 
and hateful. But there is no such rule in them that one parti 
cular object is the dearest, another dear, a third worthless and 
fourth hateful ; on the other hand, that depends upon action, 
according as they are beneficial or otherwise. 

53. For example : When a tiger confronts a person with 
ft view of devouring him, it is hateful ; but when it returns 
baffled it is worthless ; when wheedled into sport to excite 
pleasure then it is loved. Thus the ?ame animal from a dif- 

desired ; of which acquisition of happiness and cessation of misery, 
or its want and their means these four are adequate objects of 
desire and called conformable. But there is this difference between 
them : Self who is supremely blissful, and wanting in misery is 
extremely conformable, and for his being the subject of exclusive 
affection he is said to be very dear ; happiness procured from 
works of the present or past life as it is non-eternal and costs us 
much trouble and misery is called more conformable, hence for 
its being the subject of a higher degree of affection than its means 
which are painful, is said to be dearer ; and the means for happi 
ness, and cessation of misery, which are naturally not wanting in 
either of them, but are helpful to their production, (hence conform 
able) are merely dear for being the subject of only a slight degree 
of affection. Beyond these four no other object is ever desired, for 
\vhich there is no other conformable substance; but differing from 
it and the unconformable are the inimical, that is to say, inimical 
substances are never desired, for which they are no subjects of 
affection and consequently are dear neither. But as they are the 
subjects of disregard and hate, consequently they are eitlrer 
worthless or hateful. 


ference in its action is respectively the subject of hate, dis 
regard, and affection. 

54. If it be contended, to admit the presence of the three 
aforesaid qualities in the same substance will do away with 
established usage. The reply is, usage is regulated not by 
the individual quality but by the force of indication. And the 
indications are friendliness, hostility and their absence. [That 
is to say, friendliness or conformability to happiness is the 
indication of affection ; what is hostile to happiness and brings 
on pain is the indication of hate ; and what is neither friendly 
nor hostile indicates worthlessness]. 

55. To sum up then : each individuated Self is the dear 
est, and those related to him are dear, and substances different 
from them are either hateful or worthless ; for they are pro 
ductive of pain, or incapable of causing either happiness or 
misery. These are the four separate forms of things regulated 
by popular usage according to their different uses, and beyond 
them there is not another, So says YAJNAVALKYA too. 

56. It is not to be imagined that the above doctrine Self 
is most beloved finds mention only in the Jjrihadaravyakff- 
panishad; other passages to that effect occur in the Punisvidha 
Brahmana. For instance : " Who is dearer than son, house, 
land, cattle and riches, who is more internal and dearer than 
the senses, more internal than son and the rest that Self most 
inu-insically situated to them all is the dearest or most 

57. If the purport of the Sruftbe duly considered, it will 
be found, that the witnessing Intelligence alone is Self, And 
that due consideration consists in discriminating the five 
sheaths foodful and the rest and things subordinate to or in 
cluded in them, and ascertaining their difference from Self ; 
what is internal to them is Self. In this manner to know him 
by inference is meant by the verb to consider. 

58. How can a substance internally situated be seen ? In 
this wise : That self-illuminated intelligence which discovers 


waking:, dreaming:, and profound slumber-their appearaae 
and disappearance is Self. 

59- All substances of enjoyment from the Vital air* 
(Prand) to riches are more or less close to Self, for which 
they are more or less dear to men. 

60. A son is dearer than riches, and the physical body 
is dearer than son. In the sama way, the senses are dearer 
than the body, mind dearer than the senses, and Self dearest 
in comparison to mind. 

61. Though excessive dearness of Self is established in 
the Sru/t and other proofs, yet it is a matter of dispute 
between the wise and ignorant, and for the purpose of settling 
it, the Sruti cites it as an example. If it be asked what does 
that dispute prove ? It proves Self to be the dearest. 

62. A theosophist says " of all visible objects Self is the 

But ignorant persons say, son, wife, etc., are the 
dearest, and the witness (Self) for the sake of enjoying them is 

63. A pupil qualified for self-knowledge and a dissentient 
person both regard something other than Self to be dear. 
A theosophist replies to them in such a manner as to enable 
the former to have a correct knowledge of Self but to the latter 
it is a curse. 

64. He says:" That dear of yours will make you cry." 
[In short, if both of you look upon son, wife, etc., as objects of 
affection and hold them dear, their death will make you weep.] 

* Here mind is meant by Vital air or Prana. Because it is 
the receiver of reflected happiness of Self, and is the controller of 
the senses, for which it is the Lord. When mental distraction is 
caused by disease of the eye, etc., a person sa>s " if the diseased 
>rgan could go I would be happy;" therefore, the mind is to be 
taken for Prana. Then again, as the mind can neither remain in 
depart from the body living Prana, that is another reason why 
mind is to be accepted as the meaning of Vital air. 


How can the same reply apply both to the pupil and his op 
ponent? Because discrimination enables the former to see the 
defects present in his own view of the clearness of son. [As 
set forth in the three following verses.] 

65. Till a son is born to them, the parents are very 
miserable ; even after conception, the mother is liable to suffer 
from the pangs of abortion and child-birth. 

66. If the delivery be natural and free from mishaps, 
planetary influence makes the child sick and causes much 
anxiety to the parents. Subsequently when it grows up to 
youth, without profiting by the instruction given from the fifth 
to the sixteenth year, and turns out a stupid young man that is 
another source of uneasiness. Similarly after being initiated 
into the rites of the sacred thread, to continue in ignorance of 
self, as to remain unmarried after having learnt the Shastras 
are all sources of grief to them. 

67. Then again, after having settled in marriage life to 
turn into the paths of immorality and vice causes much 
uneasiness, likewise does his poverty. On the other hand, if he 
grows rich and dies, the parents suffer intensely, so that 
actually there is no end of their sufferings [commencing with 
gestation till the period of his death]. 

68. [What has been baid in respect to son, applies equally 
to wife, riches and the rest. They are faulty too, so that the 
pupil] abandons all affection for them and knowing to a 
certainty his individual Self to be the seat of supreme affection 
is ever and anon engaged in discovering him. 

69. [So far then applies to the pupil. Now in regard to 
his adversary, the theosophist s reply that "your dear will 
make you cry" is thus being fully set forth]. A dissentient 
person fond of dispute never abandons the view or side 
he takes from his animosity to a knower of Self. Such a 
one either inherits hell ar is made to pass through successive 
re-births in the several grades of animal existence, experiencing 
grief at the separation of the female partner by death, ai.d 



getting what it had no liking for. Hence the above answer 
"your dear will make you cry" is virtually a curse : 

70. [For] a knower of BRAHMA is BRAHMA,* therefore is 
he ISWARA; and what escapes his lips must verily come to- 
pass, so that dissenter surely suffers from the curse of the 

* A theosophist is BRAHMA, because the Sruti says, "A knower 
of BRAHMA is BRAHMA," and for his own experience of oneness 
with It. He is ISWARA, or Lord ; because excepting BRAHMA 
there is no other ISWARA. Or, as ISWARA the predicated intelligence 
of Maya for the knowledge of his identity with all selves is their 
collective aggregate and free , so in a theosophist for a similar 
knowledge of his identity with all selves he is their collective 
aggregate and free ; and like the discovery of uncovered BRAHMA 
to ISWARA, the predicated intelligence of Maya, in the form of 
his own self, it happens to a theosophist too. Thus then for a 
similar identity of quality also, a knower of BRAHMA is ISWARA. 
For example, a certain king and his queen had two sons, of whom 
the eldest inherited the whole state and ascended the throne, 
the youngest for his stupidity had to turn into a servant. Now 
between the brothers the difference in condition was extreme - r 
subsequently ths youngest took the injustice done to him to 
heart, and wanted to share the ancestral property equally ; justice 
was on his side, and he recovered what was due to him, and was 
duly installed. In the same way, of the father BRAHMA and 
mother Maya two sons are born called Jiva and ISWARA ; of them 
the eldest ISWARA inherrted the father s wealth in the form of 
being, intelligence, and bliss ; and the mother s, in the shape 
of omnipresence, omnipotence and universal control. The 
youngest, Jiva, was deprived of his inheritance from stupidity 
arising from want of discrimination, and was subjected to experi 
ence happiness and misery as a result of works and worship : 
so that their mutual difference is extreme. Subsequently when 
he attains the usual means of self-knowledge (discrimination, etc.,) 
speaks to ISWARA thus; "I am ISWARA. Thou hast been 
enjoying the hidden treasure of blissfulness of our common Father, 


71. One who worships the witnessing Intelligence, know, 
ing that to be his dearest self, never experiences any path ; as 
happens to men holding wife, son, and temporal enjoyments 
dear, when they die or disappear. 

72. For his being the subject of supreme affection Self 
is supremely blissful, and it is but proper so to regard him. 
As in the Taiterya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads : " From 
the happiness felt by the emperor of the universe to that 
pertaining to the position of Hiranyagarva, there is commen 
surate increase of happiness in the proportion as affection is 

73. But it may be objected, if like knowledge, Self be 
naturally blissful, then as in all modifications of the intellect, 
intelligence is said to be present, there should likewise be 

74 The reply is : That is not possible. Because, a lamp 
is a form both of light and heat, but its light only pervades 
a room; like it, intelligence only is manifested and not 

75. Just as the presence of smell, form, taste and touch 
in the same substance is recognised by the senses one only 
by each smell by means of the nose; form, eye; taste, 
tongue; and touch, skin; so of the two-intelligence and bliss 
intelligence alone is manifested. 

76. If it be alleged, Intelligence and bliss are not separate 

and after dividing the maternal property turnest me into a beggar 
asking me " To give all this to thee," and pointing the sanctioned 
works which I am to perform and the prohibited works which 
I am not to perform, thus veritably reducing me to the position 
of a servant so far as obedience to the Vedas is concerned ; 
but now by the help of Guru, I will snatch from thee, the present 
fund of blissfulness, inasmuch as I have done away with our 
associate-created-difference of visibility and invisibility, etc., and 
joined intelligence with intelligence for they are one." In this 
manner does a theosophist become BRAHMA. 


and distinct, but smell, form, etc., are mutually distinct ; then 
the question is, whether that ncn-distinction of Intelligence 
and bliss exists in the witness (Self), or elsewhere in the 
modifications of associate ? [This is for the dissenter to 

77. If the first view be admitted, then look at the identity 
of smell, etc., in the same flower too. And if you hold smell, 
form, taste and touch are distinct (for the presence of distinc 
tion in the several senses through which they are cognized), 
you should likewise admit a distinction between Intelligence 
and bliss, for a difference in the modification of the intellect 
caused by the active and good qualities of the mind. 

78. When as a result of meritorious work, the mind has 
assumed the modification of good quality, a person then dis 
covers intelligence and bliss are identical ; because the modifi 
cation of good quality is pure and faultless (transparent). But 
the modification of active quality is impure, and that is why 
the part representing bliss remaini covered and hidden as it 
under a sheath. 

79. Just as a sour fruit eaten with has its acidity 
covered, so from the modifiction of active quality blissfulness 
is covered.* 

* Just as in bewilderment or confusion of the mind, subjects 
situated near, and visible are not discovered, so from its active 
modification, the mind fails to take cognition of felicity. Or for 
his being the subject of excessive love, the felicity of Self, mani 
fested always, is only ordinary ; but when it is reflected in the 
modification of the mental function, then it is intensified. Just as 
a looking glass receives the reflection of a person but does not 
give a faithful image, so are the modifications produced from the 
active and dark qualities capable of receiving the reflection of 
intelligence only and not bliss, for which it is not discovered. Like 
the removal of acidity from an unripe and sour mango by means- 
of salt, the felicity naturally present in Self is removed by the 
modifications of the mental function stirred up by activity and ig 


80. If it be asked, even admitting the supreme blissful- 
ness of Self to be due to excessive love for him, without men 
tal restraint (Yoga) what would be the result ? [No emancipa 
tion would result from the knowledge that blissfulness of Self 
is owing to excessive affection which all individuals have for 
him; and that he is quite distinct from son, wife, physical 
body, and the other four sheaths; or as they are otherwise 
called, things dear, worthless, and hateful. Such discri 
mination is not enough^ something more is needed and that is 
visible knowledge of Self. Such is the purport of the con 
tention which his antagonist asks the Siddhantito solve.] 

81. [And he replies.] I say the same result follows dis 
crimination of Self as is produced from Yoga. Visible know 
ledge follows equally in the former as in the latter. [To be 
more explicit, mental restraint has already been pointed out 
in the preceeding section to be the means for the rising of 
knowledge, so the present consideration of Self primary, 
secondary and unreal and discriminating him from the five 
sheaths foodful and the rest, is alike productive of gnosis.] 

82. Of them (Yoga and discrimination) as a source of 
knowledge where is the authority ? The Gita says " What 
ever position a person attains to, from the discrimination of 
Self from not-self, is equally attained by the Yogi! [So that 
the result is equal in both.] 

83. To some qualified persons practice of Yoga is diffi 
cult; to others again, discrimination of Self from not-self is 
impossible ; knowing this, SREE KRISHNA pointed out these 
two separate paths for the acquisition of knowledge. 

84. Thus then, as the Gita speaks of equality of result 
following the practice of mental restraint and discrimination 
of Self, how can ye dissenter hold the first to be superior ? 
Then again, so far as desire and hate are concerned, neither 
a Fog i nor a person of discrimination is subject to them. 

85. One who knows Self to be very dear, has no more 


desire for temporal enjoyment, hence he has no ardent desire ; 
and as he has no enemy, he has no hate in him. 

86. If you contend, discriminate persons are seen to ex 
press their hate; the reply is, it holds equally true with a 
yogi. In short, whatever causes pain to the body, etc., from 
the sting of a scorpion to the injury caused by tigers and 
other wild animals, are equally objects of hate both in a Yogi 
as well as a man of discrimination. And if during such con 
duct, you cease to recognise the discrimination of the latter, 
I may as well cease to call the former a Yogi. 

87. If you say, that inasmuch as a person of discrimina 
tion sees the objective world, which a Yogi does not, therefore 
is the latter superior. The reply is, in ordinary practice this 
material world is equally dealt with by both. If you say, 
there is no cognition of phenomena in Yoga ; it holds equally 
true when the person is in his discriminating mood. 

88. And that imperception of phenomena will be spoken 
of, in the following section. It is faultless. 

89. One who experiences in his person the blissfulness of 
Self, and takes no heed of this vast material expanse, in short 
sees them not, if such a theosophist, be your Yogi, may you 
be content, and grow in years. 

90. [The purport of the work is thus briefly declared.] 

Atmananda forms the second chapter of the treatise 

Brahmananda containing five chapters. It is written for the 
benefit of qualified persons of dull intellect; and it treats on 
the natural blissfulness of each individual self situated most 


(<r) Adwaitananda *r the Felicity of Non-Duality. 

[!N the first chapter (corresponding to Sect. XI) felicity has 
been declared to be threefold, viz., that proceeding from the 
cognition of BRAHMA, self-knowledge, and temporal enjoy 
ment; to them has been added in the preceeding treatise 
another variety, to wit, self-happiness (Atmatiandd) : to prevent 
any misapprehension as to its antagonism to the first three 
forms, the author thus opens the present work : ] 

What has already been spoken of as felicity proceeding 
from (Yoga) mental restraint (Yoganandd) is no other bat 
self-happiness. Just as happiness derived from the cognition 
of BRAHMA is due to the practice of Yoga, for which it is called 
Yogananda \ and for its being unassociated, self-happiness 
(nijanandd) ; so with the view of declaring the desirability of 
knowing the felicity of BRAHMA by a separate consideration of 
the three forms of Self secondary, unreal and primary the 
word Atmanandct has been made us of.] If it be asked, 
how can self-happiness which is material be identical with the 
felicity of BRAHMA which is devoid of duality (secondless) ? 
Listen to what follows. 

a. Says the Tait&rya Upanishad: "From ether to the 
physical body, all this vast material expanse has been produced 
from self-happiness, and nothing else; therefore it is second- 
less and identical with BRAHMA." 

3. "This material universe has been produced from 
happiness, is seated in, and merges into it."* Therefore there 

* Sexual intercourse is the source of animal life and as its 
gratification is attended with felicity, it can easily be understood 
why happiness is said to be the mainspring of phenomena. Death 
resembles profound sleep, which too, is full of happiness; therefore 
we find in the text happiness to be the cause of phenomena j they 


can be no contention as to its primal cause being Self, and 
not happiness. If any one be se inclined as to maintain a 
distinction between happiness and the objective world; the 
reply is, as the universe is its product, it cannot be distinct 
from happiness ; for the resulting product is never distinct 
from its cause, as jar from earth. 

4. If it be alleged, jar is the product of the potter and 
they are distinct, so that the above rule does not hold true ; 
the reply is, there are two varieties of causes, instrumental and 
material ; of which the material is non-different from its 
product. Therefore like earth the material cause (not potter, 
the instrumental cause,) of jar, this self-happiness (Atmananda) 
is the material (not instrumental) cause of the objective world; 
for which, they are not distinct from one another. 

5. Why is potter not the material cause of jar? Because 
he is neither the resting place nor the site of its destruction ; 
in short, prior to its production and after it is destroyed, a jar 
is present in clay only, requiring the aid of a potter with his 
wheel and turning rod to give form and shape. Since there 
fore that clay or earth is its resting place, it is said to be the 
material cause. And like that earth, happiness is the material 
cause of the universe. As in the, Sruti> " These elements have 
all derived their origin from happiness." 

6. This material cause is of three different forms, viz. : 
(i) Altered condition without change of form and state; ( 2) 
Altered condition with change of form and state ; and (3) Com 
bination of the units of material cause producing different 

are seated in it, because everywhere the one predominating idea 
is how to be happy. Accumulation of wealth, possession of land, 
property, wife, cattle, son, etc., are all so many means for it, ac 
cording to popular idea ; in death we merge into sleep a typical 
condition of happiness. 

pA NCl IA DASi. 

"results (Arambhakd)* In respect to substances without form, 
the second and third do not apply. 

7. The Vaisheshikas and others who support the doctrine 
of arambka admit other causes than those which produce 
results as the source from which they are produced : because 
yarn is seen to produce cloth. Verily yarn is quite distinct 
from loth, its product ; and their modifications and uses are 
different ; no thread can be worn, but cloth is. 

8. When a substance is changed from its former condition 
into a different form k is called Parinama, as curdled milk, 
jar, and gold respectively, in which their original form and 
condition are changed. 

9. When there is no change of its former condition but 
a. substance is perceived in a different form it is Vivarlta, as 
the illusion of snake in rope. And it appears equally to form, 
less substances ; as for instance, to ether which has no form, 
.yet perceived blue, resembling a frying pan in appearance. 

10. Therefore it is fit to believe that the objective world 
is but a Vivartia of blissfulness-; and the force of Maya is 

* When from the relation or connection of the units or parts 
of the material cause a substance is produced differing in form, 
then it is called arambha ; as from the combination of atoms and 
ther half of jar the result is jar. Altered condition of the material 
<:ause is parinama as curd is of milk. It will at once be apparent 
that these indications can only apply to substances which have 
form and shape, and not elsewhere, where form and shape are; 
wanting; because both in regard to relation, and altered condition, 
on which arambha and parianama depend, parts, features or form 
is necessary. Felicity has neither parts, features, nor form, hence 
k is quite possible to regard it as the material cause of the universe 
of the first variety or Vivarttai a trite instance of which is the 
snake in rope. Here the rope is not transformed into snake, but 
a substance (snake) extremely opposed to the site (rope) and an 
altered condition of it, is projected on it. Similarly the blue of 
ether (blue sky) and its convexity are illustrations of 



the potent cause for such a belief, like things created in a 
magic performance by the use of chemical re-agents, spells, 
and charms. 

ii. But force is not distinct from matter the atoms of 
which a body is composed -hence for this absence of distinc 
tion as a separate entity, it is unreal. For example, the con 
suming force of fire is not distinct from fire ; nor can it be said 
that they are identical ; for the consuming force is seen at 
times from the action of chemical re-agents, etc., to be in abey 
ance, and not manifested. If there be no force on what is 
the obstacle to act? That is to say, fire which is distinctly 
seen, cannot possibly have any obstruction, so that if a sepa 
rate force distinct from fire be not admitted, that obstruction, 
will have no subject which is objectionable. Therefore the 
recognition of a distinct force as the subject of obstruction, 
separate from the body having that force, is necessary. 

12. Force is inferrible from action ; so that when in spite 
of the cause being present, no action results, it is called ob 
struction. For instance, when a blazing fire does not burn, 
Mantras or sacred formulas pronounced at the time, are said 
to be the cause of obstruction. 

13. The nature of Maya is illustrated by referring to the text 
of the Shvetashvataropanishad : " A Sage by rigid abstraction 
and contemplation cognises Self to be no other than BRAHMA. 
He is naturally self-illuminated but the two forces of ignorance 
envelopment and projection keep him ever concealed." 
And " action, knowledge and desire are the various forms of 
his supreme force."* 

* With reference to the causation of phenomena various are 
the hypotheses prevalent amongst the followers of the different 
schools. Some say the world has no cause, but against it the 
objection is, a jar is seen to be produced from clay, and there can 
be no jar without it ; is against what we see to be a fact. 
Others assert nothing as the cause; but nothing cannot produce 


14. Thus does the Rigveda speak of the wonderful force of 
Maya. BASHISTA speaks to the same effect too. For instance, 
41 PARABRAHMA is eternal, full on all sides [completely filling 
up the four quarters north, south, east and west], secondless 
and omnipotent. [The first three expletives represent the 
real Impersonal, and the last the associated or Personal form.] 

15. " Whenever that PARABRAHMA is revealed through any 
modification of the force of Maya, the force likewise is mani 
fested in the shape of its products. Oh RAM, in the bodies 
of Devas, men, reptiles, etc., the intelligence of BRAHMA (force 
in the form of cause of using that intelligence) is seen. 

16. "Just as motion is revealed in air, inertia, in stone, 
in water, its solvent force, and combustion ; in fire : [so does the 
universe (potentially) exist in BRAHMA in its unrevealed state 
prior to evolution.]* 

something. A third says void 1 ; which is tantamount to ether 
producing flowers, or reaping a harvest of corn where no seed has 
been sown. A fourth, atoms ; but they are formless and insentient, 
hence cannot give form and shape to objects. A fifth has time 
for the primal cause ? but even in the presence of time things are 
not produced always. A sixth asserts nature to be the universal 
cause, but in the case of sterile women we find the rule broken : 
for it is the nature of semen to fertilize the ovum yet no conception 
follows. A seventh fixes it in virtue and vice, wkich too has faults 
as it includes one variety of cause producing one set of results and 
excluding the other. There are others again, who look upon the 
elements, Prakrtti, Purush, the combination of matter and spirit 
undergoing change of form and substance, BRAHMA without the 
Mayaic force, and BRAHMA with it, as the All-Cause. Suffice it 
to say, that with the exception of the last named one, the others 
are all open to grave objections. 

* There are four sorts of destruction (Pralaya) :-() daily, 
{&) occasional, (c) material, and (d) extreme. Like the light of 
lamp the dissolution of all substances their disappearance every 
moment or in profound slumber when they are no more seen, 


17. " In ether, void is its force ; and in things destruc 
tible, liability to destruction is the force present. Just as in it<* 
egg, a huge snake remains undiscovered, so does the universe 
in the Supreme Self, remain impressed or exist potentially. 

18. "As fruits, leaves, flowers, branches with the ascend 
ing and descending stem of a creeper as well as a shady tree 
are confined within their seeds, so is tbis wonderful universe 
present in the Supreme BRAHSIA. 

19. " From the wonderful influence of time and place 
some forces are developed from the same BRAKOIA ; just as- 
several sorts of seeds sown in the ground wait for the proper 
season and soil to germinate. [To be more explicit; if a 
handful of all manner of seeds be sown, some only will 
germinate those to which the season and soil are both agree 
able others will wait for the proper time to corne, or refuse 
to grow at all, as the soil is unsuitcd to them ; similarly of all 
the forces centred in BRAHMA, some only and not all operate. 

their disappearance in ignorance rs an instance of the first ; 
with the advent of Brahma 1 s night, when everything is destroyed 
together with the three abodes, such cyclic destruction is called 
occasional ; and when he has completed his span of hundred 
years, the elements, egoism, and Mahatatwa disappear in un- 
diflerentiated cosmic matter, it is an instance of material destruc 
tion (Prakrit? Pralaya]. The extreme or fourth variety is the 
result of self-knowledge when everything else excepting BRAHMA 
appears unreal. In the first three varieties, there is no want of 
action with material cause ; but the products remafh in the form 
of impression in that cause fn short they exist potentionally, 
and in a subsequent period of time are evoluted again, so that 
from the ordinary stand-point it does not amount to totaj des 
truction of the universe, no matter whether it be revealed or other 
wise. In the fourth variety, phenomena together with Ignorance, 
their material cause, are reduced to non-being, so that to a theo- 
sophist, the world does not exist except as an illusion, no matter 
uhether it is in its unrevcaled or revealed state. 


according to the adaptability of time and locality circumstan 
ces favouring their development, and known by their action.] 

20. " RAM, whenever the eternal, manifested and infinite 
Self, through a modification of the Mayaic force assumes the 
force of intellection, it is called mind." 

21. In this way, is the mind first evoluted in the form of 
Hiranayagarbha the collective aggregate of minds ; next 
follows the perception of bondage aud emancipation ; and 
next the several abodes contained in the universe; which 
though imaginary and unreal appear tangible and substantial 1 . 
If it be asked how can unreal appear substantial ? Just at 
tales concocted for the amusement of children appear real to 
them and are believed so. 

22. The nurse with a view of amusing the children under 
her charge repeats the following tale : " In a certain country 
there resided three handsome princes. 

23. "Of whom two have not been born yet, while the 
third has not been conceived in its mother s womb. All the 
three brothers were endowed with good qualities, and they 
lived in a city which existed not. 

24. "Their minds were unerring too; as they went out 
of the city on a certain occasion, they found trees laden with 
fruits in the ether. 

25. "Now they were desirous of sport, and armed as. 
they were with bow and arrows, they give chase to a horned 
rabbit, killed and partook of the flesh and arrived at a future 
city where they are living in happiness." 

26. " RAM, when the children heard this tale from the 
nurse, they believed it to be true, for they were loo young to 
exercise any judgment." 

27. Similarly the composition of this tangible universe 
appears real to dull and ignorant persons incapable of judg 
ing ; and its reality is as firmly implanted in their mind as the 
reality of the incidents of the above story in the boys* 


28. Thus does BASHISTA expound the nature of Mayaic 
force. Its unreality is now being ascertained. 

29. Maya is distinct both from its product, the world, 
and its site or receptacle, BRAHMA ; just as the force of fire is 
distinct both from its action or product, sparks, and its seat or 
receptacle, charcoal : inasmuch as they are visible while the 
presence of force is only to be inferred from its action or 

30. A jar with its thickness and round cavity is a product; 
ad earth with its properties sound, form, smell, touch and 
taste is its receptacle ; but the force which produces the jar 
is distinct from both.* 

31. Force has neither thickness, nor roundness of cavity, 
(properties of the product) ; nor has it sound, form, smell, 
touch and taste properties belonging to the receptacle (earth) 
hence it is distinct from both ; and for this distinction, it is 
unthinkable and indescribable. 

32. Prior to the production of jar, the force present in 
earth remained 4atent, for which it could not then be dis 
covered; with the help of potter, his turning rod and wheel, 
that force undergoes mutation and is modified into jar. 

33. Indiscriminate persons regard the properties of the 
product (its grossness and round cavity), and those inherent 
in the cause (sound, form, taste, touch and smell) as identically 
one, and give the name jar to mark to that oneness. 

34. No jar exists prior to a potter s moulding a lump of 
clay with the help of his stick and wheel, so that to speak of 
this prior condition of earth as a form of jar, is only an in 
stance of indiscriminate thinking. That jar, is only a subse 
quent product when its thick form and round cavity are deve 
loped ; then only is it fit to be called so. 

* Force has neither thickness nor roundness of cavity like the 
jar, nor has it the properties, sound, etc., therefore it is distinct 
from the product and its receptacle earth, in short, indescribable. 


35- A jar is not distinct from earth, inasmuch as it is 
never found without it j nor is it identical with earth, inas 
much as it is never seen in a lump of clay. 

36. Therefore like force, jar is equally indescribable ; 
for which, it is a product of force. If it be asked since force 
and its product are equally indescribable, what necessity is 
there for retaining their separate use ? The reply is, force 
is used to express invisibility ; while visible condition is ex 
pressed by the word jar. 

37. To remove misapprehension about the invisibility of 
Mayaic force being subsequently visible it is said : 

In a magical performance, the force of illusion remains 
invisible till the usual spells, mantras, and re-agents are used > 
subsequent to which, it succeeds in creating charmed fruits, 
trees, etc, 

38. " For their being material, all changed or trans 
formed products are liable to destruction ; but their site or 
receptacle (as earth the receptacle of jar) is real." (Sruti.} 

39. " Change is a mere name, having no reality, inas 
much as excepting its name there is nothing real in jar ; but 
its receptacle earth is real." (Chhandagya Upanuhad. ) 

40. Regarding visible products [jar and the rest], their 
invisible cause, force, and their receptacle, earth, the first two 
(product and force) for their relation to time (existing in one 
condition of time and not always in the three) are said to be 
destructible. But their receptacle, earth, as it exists always in 
the three conditions of time, is real. 

41. Visible products [jar, etc.,] are naturally unreal and 
discovered so ; likewise for their being results of action, they 
are destructible. And subsequent to production as they are 
used by name, that -also is another cause of their destruc- 
tibility [for name and form are subject to destruction.] 

42. Moreover, after their destruction, their name only 
remains in use among, or is pronounced by, men. And for 
phenomena being ascertained by name [inasmuch as it is 


the means of distinguishing one object from another] they arc 
of the same nature as name% for name is pronounced by the 
tongue which produces sound, and as visible products are 
distinguished by name, consequently they resemble it. 

43. For the disappearance of their actual condition, 
liability to destruction, and natural resemblance with name 
pronounced by the organ of speech, like the elements earth, 
etc., form of visible products is not even partially real. [la 
short, no part of a jar which is a product of earth, thick with 
a round cavity, is real. Because the actual condition of earth 
has undergone modification to produce it; it is destructible; 
and a product of sound only. " Like the earth" is an exclu 
sive example in regard to the three causes of unreality. Now 
the inference is : the product of earth, jar, is fit to be con 
sidered unreal (i) for its being a transformed result ; what 
is not unreal is also not transformed, as for instance, the 
material cause earth of jar. (2) Similarly for its destructibility, 
ajar is unreal; what is not unreal is indestructible. 
(3) Likewise for its being a creation of the organ of speech 
it resembles sound only in nature, and is unreal ; what 
is not unreal never resembles articulate sound only, 
as Self. 

44. But during the period of action [when a jar is being 
formed], and both prior to its origin and subsequently, [when 
it has not been destroyed yet] ; earth, for its uniform ap 
pearance, preserving its real nature, and indestructibility, is 
real. Here the inference is, that earth is fit to be regarded 
real, for its uniform appearance in all the three conditions 
of time like Self, and preserving its real nature. 

45. Now for the contention of the Vedantins antagonist. 
He asks. If what you have expressed by the three words 
4 visible, jar, and transformed product) are unreal, how is 
it that knowledge of earth does not cause their destruction ? 
[Like the destruction of the unreal snake from the knowledge 
of its site, rope.] 


46. It has already been destroyed by the same cause 
\vhich has removed from you the idea of reality of jar. If it be 
contended, in the illusory attribution of silver in nacre, the 
actual nature of nacre is only not perceived, but no destruction 
of its reality is ever seen to follow ; then as that is an unassocia 
ted illusion, while this is associated, therefore, here destruc 
tion of the perception of reality from correct knowledge 
of site should be regarded as destruction and not impercep- 
tion, of actual substance.* 

*. There are two sorts of illusions, unassociated and associated ; 
those produced from ignorance only are called unassociated, as 
the illusion of snake in rope and silver in nacre. Now in regard to 
these illusions, the instrumental causes are: (i) Impression of 
similarity, (2) Defective sight, (3) Defect in the witness, (4) 
Defect in the subject of demonstration, and (5) Partial (ordinary) 
knowledge of the site on which illusion is projected or super 
imposed [portion represented by this ]; and as they help the 
ignorance concerning the rope consequently they are "associated." 
But for a difference in the modification of the period of action, and 
its prior interval, instrumental causes are divisible into two varie 
ties, viz., from whose contiguity an action is produced, and without 
which no action results ; it is called the instrument modifying the 
period of action. For example, a pot of water placed close to a 
wall where the sun s rays have been reflected, and the instrument 
different from it, is the modification prior to the period of action : 
as for instance, the wheel and turning rod of a jar. The word 
"associate" has for its meaning the instrument in the form of 
modification of the time of action. Such an instrument is wanting 
in the snake illusion, for which it is "unassociated"; and illusion 
produced from associate (the aforesaid distinct instrument) to 
gether with .ignorance is called associated : as the reflection of 
face in mirror, and the reflected shadow of a person standing on 
the river bank, of trees growing there, or of the blue convex ether, 
mirage, etc. All of them are caused by the several associates 
together with ignorance of the site of illusion. Regarding reflec 
tion, light and mirror or the contiguity of water are the associates; 


47. The reflection of a person s face in water appearing 
inverted is never really taken for the person ; and no one 
with or without discrimination ever believes that face to be 
real like the person standing on the river bank whose reflec 
tion it is. 

48. In the same way, notwithstanding the risibility of 
phenomena, to know their unreality and believe them so, is 
the certain means of discovering the secondless blissfulness of 
Self who alone is real ; and according to the doctrine of non- 
duality, such knowledge procures emancipation. If it be said, 

sunlight and relation of darkness are similar associates in the case 
of ether reflected in water ; in the matter of its panlike shape, 
contiguity of the earth which is round, is the associate ; in mirage, 
the associates are the sand, and sun s rays glistening on it creating 
the illusion of water. In this manner, associates are to be 
considered. In the i"unassociated" variety, knowledge of the 
site of illusion removes the two forces of ignorance, envelopment 
and projection, together with its products, so that absence of the 
imaginary [snake] and the abiding continuance of its site (rope) is 
the indication of destruction or removal of the snake illusion. In 
"associated illusions," ignorance with its envelopment are both 
destroyed and obstructed ; but through the influence of the obsta 
cle of ignorance in the shape of associate, there does not follow 
destruction of the action of its creating or projecting force together 
with its cause, the same force ; but is only removed, prevented 
or obstructed, and is actually perceived for some time ; so that the 
abiding site continues to the last : or the disappearance of the 
actuality of the illusory substance is no indication of prevention or 
obstacle; on the other hand, the certain knowledge of unreality or 
the absence in all the three conditions of time, is the indication of 
removal. Thus then, in regard to earth and gold, the respective 
mistakes of jar and earring and in the case of [egoism too, the illu 
sions are associated. Therefore the ascertainment of their un 
reality in the manner aforesaid, is the recognised indication of 
removal and not the absence of actual substance ; and necessarily 
the reality of the site of illusion should certainly then come to be 
recognised as the remnant of the site. 


knowledge of jar as a modification of earth is enough to re 
move its reality, but it has not been established as such modifi 
cation or altered condition of earth; then the reply is, since 
there is no alteration of the appearance of earth in jar, it is 
therefore an altered condition (vivartta) of earth. 

49. [To be more explicit : ] 

When the original form of the material cause is altered, as 
curd is of milk, it is called Parinama. In Vivartta there is 
no alteration of form in the material cause ; as for instance, in 
an earthen jar and gold earring, their respective material cause, 
earth and gold retains their appearance, and the jar and 
are ring only altered conditions or modifications.* 

50. If it be said, after a jar is broken, its fragments, do 
not resemble earth in appearance, hence it is proper to speak 
of it as a modification or altered form of earth ; the reply is, 
after the broken parts are reduced into powder, they resemble 
earth and not any separate substance : and this is plainly 
visible. As for gold, it is quite apparent in the earring to re 
quire any discussion. 

51. To say that the admission of earring and jar as alter 
ed conditions without change of substance (gold and earth 

* What has been said about jar and earring being altered con 
ditions without change of the original substance of earth and gold 
respectively, is from the ordinary standpoint of common sense ; for 
if subjected to a rigid analysis, it will be evident, that as the Ve- 
daniin does not recognise anything else but intelligence to be the 
site (adhisthan), consequently earth and gold cannot possibly be 
the site of jar and earring for both are unreal ; and one unreality 
cannot be the site of another. On the other hand, as in snake 
illusion, intelligence associated with the rope is the site on which 
the snake is projected or created , so is intelligence associated with 
their respective maie^als earth and gold, the site of their products 
jar and earring; so that the assertion that they (jar, etc.,) are 
modifications or altered conditions without change of the original 
substance or material cause (Vivartta) is beyond dispute. 


respectively) will reduce thickened milk into a similar modifi 
cation of milk is absurd. Because here the original appear 
ance of milk has been changed, and there is the further pos 
sibility of changing it into curd, and neither curd nor thickened 
milk can be made to assume the original appearance of milk ; 
hence they are altered forms of milk (Parinama). But even 
after earth and gold have been transformed into jar and earring, 
there is no disappearance of the original appe arance of earth 
and gold, in their respective products; for which, they are 
called Vivartta. 

52. If it be asked, like the two modifications with and 
without change of original substance or form, why not recog 
nise the theory of Aramlha in connection with earth and gold? 
Because in that case, earth and gold will be duplicated. That 
is to say, according to the supporters of the doctrine of 
Arambha (Naiyayikas) the material cause (earth) of jar (its 
product or action) will assume the shape both of action and 
cause and thus be duplicated ; so that after thus being doubled 
in the shape of action and cause, the properties will likewise be 
doubled. And since form, touch, taste, smell, and sound are 
by them admitted to be distinct both in the cause and its pro 
duct, consequently it amounts to a duplication of properties.* 

* For a practical difference between the genus of cause and the 
genus of effect, a distinction is perceived in them, so that for the 
same cause being modified into cause and effect, the cause wHl be 
duplicated in respect to effect, and when the cause form and the 
rest as well as the properties of the effect form, touch, smell, 
taste and sound should also be doubled (differentiated) ; but in 
practice no one says "these are the properties of yarn and these of 
the cloth its product ; nor is such distinction observable. Then 
again, as in the practical destruction of cause and effect their iden 
tity is not established, so to create a distinction in the cause yarn, 
etc., from want of perception of cloth, Joes not establish any dis 
tinction between cause and effect ; on the other hand, their imagi 
nary distinction and natural identity are owing to an indescribable 


53. ARAJNI speaks of the unreality of phenomena by allu 
ding to the three illustrations of clay, gold and iron (Chhando- 
gya Upanishad Chat. VI.) ; and as their unreality has been 
inferentially established, so Is the unreality of the objective 
world which is virtually a product of the elements, and their 
quintuplication, over and over thought of, that it may continue 
as a standing impression in the mind. 

54. If it be asked what necessity is there to enquire after 
and ascertain the unreality of effects ? To establish knowledge 
of effects produced from knowledge df cause. To this purpose 
the sage UDALAKA addresses his pupil Shvetaketu : "As from 
the knowledge of a lump of clay all earthen objects are 
known." But how can knowledge of Reality the cause of 
phenomena produce knowledge of their unreality ? 

55. Reality and unreality both are present in phenomena 
or effects ; therefore knowledge of cause produces knowledge 
of the complement of reality included in them. Ordinarily 
speaking, a jar which is a modification of clay the material 
cause, is called action, or effect; its changed portion is 
unreal, and earth, real; and this knowledge results from know 
ledge of cause [clay]. 

56. The complement of unreality imbedded in effects, as 
it serves no purpose, needs not be known ; but knowledge of 
the complement of reality is alone useful for the purpose of 

57. For knowledge of cause to produce knowledge of 
effect is not at all surprising ; hence what has already been 
said in reference to UDALAKA S address to the pupil SHVETA 
KETU. "As from a lump of clay all earthen objects are 
known* cannot excite any wonder. So says his opponent. 

58. And thfe Vedantin replies : So far as persons of dis 
crimination are concerned, it is true indeed. The complement 

Identity of relation : hence the doctrine of Arambha or production 
of a substance different in form from its material cause, its un 


of reality inherent in phenomena resembles the cause, and 
those who know it are not at all surprised. But how can the 
wonder of ignorant persons, wanting in discrimination be 
prevented ? 

59. The followers of Naya who regard intimate relation, 
its want, and the instrumental cause as the three causes ; the 
advocates of Sankkya who look upon change of prior condi 
tion as the cause ; an ordinary men unacquainted with the two 
aforesaid schools of philosophy all of them are sure to be 
astonished from listening "knowledge of one cause produces 
knowledge of many effects." 

60. In order to induce a pupil to ascertain tne identity 
of the individual and universal spirit which is the subject of 
non-duality, it has been said in the Chhandogya Upanishad 
(Chapt. VI.)," From knowledge of one cause all objects are 
known," and not for a desire of speaking about phenomena. 

61. [The above Sruti text is now being explained] : 
As from knowledge of one lump of clay all earthen objects 

are known, so from knowledge of one BRAHMA, the whole 
universe is known to be Its effect, action or product [as un 
real as the snake in rope]. 

62. BRAHMA is being, intelligence, and bliss; but the 
universe is nominal and non-eternal. This indication of 
PARABRAHMA occurs in the Uttar Tapniya Upanishad. 

63. ARUNI speaks of BRAHMA as being or existence, the 
Rig Vedic Brahman demonstrates intelligence, and SANAT- 
KUiua blissfulness only. [ARUNI in his discourse thus address 
es ths pupil SHVETAKETU endearingly : " Prior to the evolution 
of the univerge there existed being ." (Chhandogya Upanishad 
Chapt. VI.) " Intelligence is the substrate of all." (Ailerya 
Upanishad.) SANATKUMAR in reply to NARAD used the word 
Bhuma meaning fullness and bliss]. There are other texts 
to the same purpose too. 

64. Regarding the universe, passages occur in the Sruti 
to shew that it is mere name and form and therefore unreal : 


" The Supreme Self thought of their several forms and gave 
them names." 

65. And "Prior to its evolution, the universe was in an 
unmanifested condition, subsequently it was manifested in two 
ways, viz., by name and form." (Brihadaranyak Upanishada.) 
Here unmanifested refers to the indescribable Mayaic force 
inherent in BRAHMA. 

66. That Maya present in BRAHMA (Itself unchangeable) 
was modified or transformed into the elements ether and the 
rest, and the objective universe. Maya is nothing else but 
(Prakrili) matter, the universal material cause; and BRAHMA 
as the receptacle of that (Maya) illusion is the Supreme Lord 
t. e., its controller. 

67. The first product of this modification or altered con 
dition of matter is ether; it is existent, manifested and dear 
properties derived from the cause,* BRAHMA ; and naturally it 
is void. Now of these two sets of properties those derived 
from BRAHMA are real, but its individual property is unreal. 

68. Because as it did not exist prior to the origin of ether, 
and will subsequently be destroyed along with it, consequently 
though manifested so long as ether lasts, it is unreal. How ? 
What did not exist originally and will cease to be in the end, 
must be taken for the time being it exists, as similarly non 

69. The testimony of the Gita goes also to extablish 
what has just been said. " ARJUN, what are originally unmani 
fested, manifested in the interval between birth and death, and 

* The properties of cause are transmitted to its products ; for 
instance sound is said to belong to ether which is its individual 
property ; water has sound derived from ether, while its own 
properties are sweet taste, cold feel, etc.; similarly in regard to 
the three other elements. Therefore the text seeks to create a 
distinction between the two sets of properties, to shew the com 
plement of reality as also its reverse, present in phenomena. 


unmanifestcd in the end, of such nature are the elements ether, 
etc." So spoke KRISHNA to ARJUNA, 

70. As in all earthen objects (jar, etc.), earth pervades 
them both in and out, and in all conditions of time ; so exist 
ence, etc., pervade ether. If it be asked how can being and 
the rest be inferred apart from ether ? The reply is, in the 
same way as you infer your own self, to be existence, intelli 
gence and bliss. 

71. When ether is forgot, say what do you discover in its 
stead ? If you say void, well that is mere sound ; for liter 
ally it conveys the sense of a receptacle in which that void 
was existent ; but now the void is wanting, consequently its 
receptacle is the remnant something which is manifested. 

72. If it be alleged, this does not settle the question ef 
existence, intelligence and bliss being inferred apart from 
ether. It is therefore said. As the receptacle manifesting the 
absence of ether in it, it is being or existence ; and as the 
subject of indifference it is bliss or felicity ; for what is 
devoid of friendliness or hostility is recognised as felicity. 

73. Subjects that are friendly cause gladness of the intel 
lect, as their reverse grief; and absence of both produces 
bFissfulness experienced by one s own self. If it be asfced? 
Why not grief ? Because so far as grief is concerned, it is 
never present in self.* 

* Without definite knowledge of happiness in some shape as 
"ihis is happiness," its existence is never manifested. Therefore as 
no happiness can be seen without self who is knowledge, conse 
quently the popular conception of happiness is also of self. What 
is discovered in connection with a subject is an action of the modi 
fication of the mental function ; grief belongs to the nature of 
self, inasmuch as there are no visible proofs seen to that effect ; for 
instance no one ever experiences " I am unhappy". On the other 
hand, passages occur in the Sruti where self is said to be intelli 
gence and bliss. Moreover every one desires to be happy. Now 
this popular expression is based on ignorance, Fur self is happi- 


74. Though that happiness of self is fixed and eternal yet 
as the mind, its instrument of cognition is fickle and always 
changing its site from one object to another, consequently it 
is but proper to consider both happiness and grief are mental 

75. In the same way, is the blissfulness of ether establish. 
d. Its existence and intelligence require no mention as they 
are equally admitted [by the Vedantin and his opponent]. 
From air to the physical body, all material objects should be 
similarly considered to trace the complement of reality and 
connect it with * being/ intelligence/ and bliss/ 

76. Motion and touch are the two forms of air; combus 
tion and light of fire; solution, of water; and hardness, of 
earth. This is certain, 

77. Drugs, food grains, and bodies too, have uncommon 
forms [in their individual virtues] ; which should be duly 

78. Name and form are as various as they are distinct, 
but being, intelligence, and bliss are equally seated in them 
all, so that here there is no contention.* 

79. Both name and form are unreal, for they are derivated 

ness, and a desire for happiness can only be when the individual 
is in want of it ; those who are ignorant of the Sruti and have 
received no instruction on self-knowledge clamour for happiness ; 
they experience felicity by receiving the reflection of intelligence 
from self, which acting on the mental function creates a relation 
between happiness and self thus making him the subject of affec 
tion and feeling contentment ; but this is not found to follow in 
respect to grief as naturally belonging to self. 

* A bubble is neither distinct from, nor one with the sea; 
nor is it either ; so are foam, wave, etc., for which they , 4 are said to 
be indescribable ; and as they are born to die, they are unreal in 
comparison to the sea. Similarly as name .and form are indes 
cribable and subject to birth and destruction, they are unreal 
respecting Brahma. 



products ; and liable to destruction. Therefore regard them ku 
the same light as waves, froth and bubbles are of the sea* _ in 
short, unreal. 

80. With the visible knowledge of PARABRAHMA as ever 
lasting intelligence and bliss, name and form appear unreal ; 
and are shortly afterwards abandoned by those desirous of 

Si. As duality (name and form) come to be disregarded, 
so does BRAHMA become visible ; and as BRAHMA comes to be 
visibly known, so is duality (the objective universe) abandoned. 

82. From the help of both the above practices (disregard 
of duality and cognition of BRAHMA), a theosophist for his 
knowledge of BRAHMA is freed, though he may be alive ; and 
whatever may be his body. 

83. Wise men regard thinking, talking and discussing on 
BRAHMA so as to help each other to cognise It in short, to be 
intent on this one subject as tirahmabhyas. 

84. Impression of the reality of this vast material expanse 
eternally abiding in the mind is removed from long and un 
interrupted practice of the aforesaid Brahmaic knowledge with 

85. Like the force of clay, the Brahmaic force Maya 
creates many different effects, which are unreal. And sleep 
and dreams are illustrations. 

86. Just as the force of sleep creates things which are 
impossible or difficult of being done; so does the force of 
Maya centred in BRAHMA create, preserve, and destroy the 


87. Just as in dream, a person sees himself walking in the 

* Bubbles foam, waves, etc,, are neither distinct form the sea, 
nor its reverse, nor both ; hence indescribable ; and as they are 
subject to birth and destruction, they are unreal in regard to the 
sea ; similarly for name and form being indescribable, and subject 
to birth and destruction, they are unreal in respect to BRAHMA. 


sky (ether), his own head beheaded, (and that dream lasting 
for a couple of hours appears to have a duration of years) ; and 
sees his dead relations, son, etc. 

88. There is no rule to settle the consistency or pos 
sibility of the things then occuring, but they are seen just as 
they happen. 

89. Since therefore the force of sleep is seen to be pos 
sessed with such marvellous power, where is the wonder for 
the force of Maya to have indescribable power ? 

90. Just as in a person lying down to sleep, it produces 
dreams of various sorts ; so the May die force seated in BRAHMA 
(devoid of action), creates diverse products through change. 

91. Ether, air, fire, water, earth, Urahmds egg, the 
fourteen abodes, together with animate and inanimate objects 
(such as stone etc.,} are all changed products of Maya. Reflec 
tion of intelligence in the internal organ inside the body, and 
its absence,, constitute the difference of sentient or animate, 
and its reverse insentient or inanimate. 

92. The ordinary indication of BRAHMA, being intelli 
gence 7 and bliss is equally present in both the animate 
and inanimate : name and form create their individual 

93. As in a cloth, the appearance of trees, beasts, etc., 
with which it is worked up is unreal, so name and from are 
unreal respecting BRAHMA. And if they are abandoned (for 
their unreality), the (remaining) complement of Reality is per 
ceived to be BRAHMA. 

94. Just as person standing on the riverbank sees his 
image reflected in the water which he never confounds for 
himself, on the other hand fixes his identity with the body 
standing on the bank ; so in the matter of name and form, 
though visible, the perception of their reality having ceased or 
been abandoned, self appears as BRAHMA. 

95. As thousands and thousands of imaginary substances 


(mental creations) though present are discarded alike by all, 
so are name and form equally fit to be abandoned. 

96. As these imaginary products created by the mind last 
for a short time to be replaced by others; but those which dis 
appear, never re-appear ; similarly respecting the cognition of 
self as BRAHMA and the unreality of phenomena, when they 
have been once ascertained to be so, the perception of that 
Identity of self and BRAHMA receives neither any check nor 
meets with obstruction ; and the duality (phenomena) cease 
to re-appear : 

97. Just as manhood never returns to youth, nor old age 
to manhood ; and as a dead father does not re-appear, nor 
yesterday come back again. 

98. What is the difference between ordinary practice in 
reference to phenomena liable to destruction every moment, 
and mental creation ? None whatever. Therefore though 
visible, con-fide not in the reality of the objective universe. 

99. If it be asked, what is the benefit of not conforming. 
to ordinary practice ? The reply is, discarding the reality of 
phenomena makes the intellect assume the modification of 
BRAHMA ; it receives no more obstruction and thus gets firmly 
seated there. And the ordinary practice [of begging, eating, 
etc.,] in which theosophists are found to be engaged resemble 
those performers of popular sports who assume the garb of a 
tiger, etc., to create diversion in, and not for devouring, the 

100. Just as in a current, motion of the water shakes not 
the stones and pebbles imbedded in the river-bed; so does 
the ordinary practice of theosophists shake not their non- 
duality, or the belief of unreality of duality (phenomena). 

101. As in a bright mirror, many objects are reflected 
together with the ether which forms as it were their womb ; so 
in BRAHMA which is eternal, intelligence and bliss, is discovered 
the infinite ether containing the universe. 

102. As without looking in the mirror, things reflected 


there are not seen, so without the ascertainment of the ever 
lasting intelligence and bliss of BRAHMA how are name and 
form to be perceived ? 

103. After the discovery of BRAHMA in the form of ever 
lasting intelligence and bliss, the intellect is firmly to be con 
centrated on It, leaving aside phenomena, which (though 
visible) are mere name and form, and unreal. 

104. If that is done, devoid of materiality BRAHMA is estab 
lished as being, intelligence and bliss; and here all enquirers- 
rest their belief ever afterwards. 

105. This third chapter deals on the unreality of pheno 
mena, and the secondless blissfulness which proceeds from, 
such thinking-. 

(d) On the Felicity produced from Self-kncrwledeg. 

MENTAL restraint, and discrimination of Self as the yonP 
reality, producing visible knowledge of BRAHMA and Its bl-iss- 
fulness (in a theosophist), will form the subject of the present 

2. Like material felicity, happiness proceeding from 
Self-knowledge is also a modification of the intellect. From a 
natural distinction in its varieties, it is said to be of four sons. 

3. They are : 

(a) Absence of pain or misery. 
(d) Satiety, or acquisition of all desired enjoyments. 
(c) Satisfaction produced from the realization or successful 
accomplishment of what was proper to be done ; and 
(d). Acquisition of what was fit to have. 

4. Misery is of two sorts, according as it relates to 
present or future existence. Removal of misery relating to 
the present life is now being set forth after the text of the 

* It may properly be contended, that as in a previous portion, 
happiness has been defined to be of three different sorts, the intro 
duction of a fourth variety is quite uncalled for, the more so, as it 
is said to be a modification of the intellect, like material felicity. 
Naturally then, its place would be subordinate to, or included in 
material felicity. Now such a contention does not stand the test of 
a searching enquiry. For, material felicity has been experienced 
in all prior re-incarnations ifrom Brahma" to the lowest insect ; 
similarly the felicity of profound slumber (Brahmaic bliss) and 
what is derived ftom impressions have been experienced ; but it is 
reserved for a theosophist to experience the blissfulness proceeding 
from knowledge; and as he is beyond the pale of re-birth, he can 
have no prior impression of it. Thus then it is quite a separate 
form of happiness without envelopment, full, and with modification 
of the intellect as its indication. 


5 When a person knows the Alma to be self and says 
41 This (self) am I," what desire of enjoyment can linger in the 
body to cause him pain at its remaining ungratified." None 
whatever. [For that knowledge removes all desire of enjoy 
ment, both present.and future]. 

6. The Ainta has been spoken of in two ways, viz., the 
Individual and Supreme Selves. Intelligence present in the 
physical, subtle and cause-bodies and mistaken with them 
as identical, is regarded as the agent, the enjoyer, and called 
Jiva or individual. 

7. The Supreme Self is everlasting intelligence and 
bliss. As the site or substrate of phenomena with name and 
form, He is mistaken as identically one with them. Discrimi 
nation establishes his distinction both from the three aforesaid 
bodies and material objects. 

8. Desire of enjoyment for the gratification of the 
enjoyer, produces disease which can only affect the three 
bodies, but not self. 

9. Different diseases affecting different individuals owing 
to a difference in their temperaments have their seat in the 
physical body. Passions and desires are the diseases of the 
subtle body ; and the seeds (impressions) of disease of both 
the physical and subtle bodies are seated in the cause body. 

10. Consideration of the Supreme Self in the manner 
p ointed out in connection with the " Felicity of non-duality" 

( Vide Section XIII.), leaves no desire of enjoyment. For 
a theosophist no more confounds phenomena with reality ; con- 
seq uently what more desire can he have ? 

11. While on the subject of the felicity of Self (Section 
XII.) the nature of the individual Self has been ascertained, 
and since there is no enjoyer so far as the three bodies are 
concerned how then will disease be produced ? 

12. To think of merit and demerit is the source of pain 
relating to future existence. But as has already been said, 

(Section XI. v.5-9.) " no thoughts harass the wise." 


13. Just as water touches not the leaves of the lotus, 
so aiter gnosis has arisen future works cannot touch a theoso- 
phist : [they affect him not, producing neither merit nor 

14. Like reeds with cotton tufts (Saccharum sponianeurri) 
burnt at once by the contact of fire, his accumulated works 
are burnt by knowledge. 

15. As in the Gita : " ARJUN, as a blazing fire consumes 
the fuel and reduces it into ashes, so does the lire of know, 
ledge reduce all works* into ashes." 

16. He who does not believe in his own instrumentality 
of action " i am a doer of virtue," who has neither inclination 
lor enjoying the fruits of actions, good and bad, nor doubts 
.about them, is no destroyer, though he slays all living 
creatures in the universe; nor has he to suffer ihe torments of 
.hell or objective existence hereafter. 

17. "Neither matricide, HOT parricide, neither theft nor 
procuring abortion and something equally sinful can destroy 
.his emancipation, and injure the splendour and beauty of his 
iace." (Chhandogya Upanishad.} 

1 8. The Sruii likewise speaks of the acquisition of all 

* " All works" have been taken for accumulated works by 
certain professors, but there are others who hold them to include 
the accumulated, fructescent and current works. Now, the fruc- 
tescent are said to be exhausted by actual consummation of their 
results, so that the view of their being destroyed by knowledge will 
create an antagonism with the generally received doctrine. Every 
where it is maintained that a difference is found even amongst 
theos6phists, in their present condition ; some receiving homage of 
the high and low ; others witn difficulty living by means of begging. 
Some are provided with all comforts, others suffering the usual 
miseries of a mendicant s life and this distinction is due to the 
result of works done in a prior life and which have already com 
menced to bear fruit. Even Isiuara is unable to counteract them ; 
they can only be exhausted by actual enjoyment of their results. 


desired enjoyments by a theosophist, as it does of his freedom 
from pain: u The theosophist attaining all desires is freed 
from death/ 

19. " Whether eating, or playing with women ; driving 
a chariot or riding on horse-hack, etc., along with his com 
panions, -be they wise or ignorant, he remembers not his body, 
but says that his fructescent works having-: not yet been 
exhausted keeps his body alive." (Chhandogya Upanishad ) 

20. " The theosophist attains all desires at once " so says 
the Taiterya Upanishad. Unlike the ignorant, he is no more 
re-born to enjoy the fruits of works done ; but as a result of 
knowledge, his accumulated works are destroyed, leaving the 
fructescent to be exhausted by consummation in the present 
life ; but his current (future) works can touch him not [as has 
already been said.] 

21. "With youth, beauty, learning, health, firmness of: 
heart combined an army protecting the whole earth. 

22. " Whatever happiness is experienced by such a 
mighty king endowed with all convinceivable enjoyments and 
satiated with them is attained by {.he theosophist too."* 

23. Both in that king and in the wise, no desires are left 
for human enjoyment, so that the attainment of happiness in 
the form of satiety is equal in them. But in the king it is 
due to want of desire; while in the wise, discrimination is the 
source of that absence of desire; so that, cessation of desire 
procuring satiety is equal in both. 

24. Wise men as well as men learned in the Shastras^ 
regard temporal enjoyments to be faulty. In the Maitrayniya 
Shakha, Raja Brihadiath speaks disparagingly of them and 
points out how defective are they. 

* The word too has a wider range, it includes all manner of 
happiness and its different grades, beginning with what is enjoyed 
by Gandharvas to that of Brahma all this is equally felt by the 


25. Defects pertaining to the physical body, mind, and 
vanous sorts of material enjoyments are all spoken of by him. 
Just as no one shows any desire to eat rice-pudding vomited 
by a dog, so do men of discrimination show no desire for 
temporal enjoyment. 

26. Though, so far as absence of desire is concerned, 
both the king and theosophist are said to be equal, yet the 
latter is superior. For the king had to encounter much pain 
and hardship in the beginning, and is further subject to much 
anxiety, lest his authority be destroyed at some future period. 
These are the two defects under which he suffers. 

27. They cannot apply to a theosophist for which he 
is superior to the king. Then again, the king is particularly 
fond of dancing and music, which the man of discrimination 
cares not ; that is another cause of superiority. 

28. There are two sorts of Gandharvas : 

Those incarnated in the present Kalpa as men and as a 
particular result of meritorious works who have inherited the 
condition of a Gandharva are called Men-Gandharvas. 

29. When for meritorious work done in a prior Kalpa, 
one attains the condition of Gandharva in the beginning of the 
present Kalpa, he is called Deva-Gandharva. 

30. Demigods and the spirits of one s departed ancestors 
eternally live in their own abodes. Those who have attained 
the condition of a Deva in the beginning of a Kalpa are called 

31. Those who have secured an excellent position as a 
result of the performance of horse-sacrifice in the present 
Kalpa are more honored than Ajan-Devatas, and are called 

32. Yama and Agni etc., are the principal Devas ; Rudra 
and Brihaspati are two well-known ; Trajapati is called Virat ; 
and Brahma, Threadsoul Hiranyagarbha. 

33. From the sovereign exercising universal sway to the 
Threadsoul Hiranyagarbha, every one is desirous of enjoying 


more happiness than what he has ; but the blissfulness of self 
which none can adequately express nor mind conceive of, is 
superior to them all. 

34. Regarding that desire for obtaining superior happi- 
nees which king and the rest have, a theosophist heeds not ; 
and as he is perfectly unconcerned and free from desire, he is 
said to experience it all. 

35. Just as he experiences happiness in his own body, 
for being the witness of the modification of intellect assuming 
the shape of happiness ; so for a similar witness of the same 
modification of intellect in others too, he enjoys happiness. 

36. If it be contended, that as ignorant persons are 
similar witnesses, they also can be said to enjoy all manner of 
happiness. That is impossible. For the knowledge that 
am the witness in all intellects seated inside all bodies" is 
absent in them. As the Sruti says : "Who knows [each 
individuated self to be Brahma] enjoys all happiness." 

37. The theosophist thus sings of his being the all-self 
as in the text of the Sama Veda : "I am the food as well as its 

38. Having thus declared the first and second varieties 
of felicity proceeding from knowledge of self, the remaining 
two viz., satisfaction from the successful accomplishment of 
what was proper to be done, and acquisition of the attainable 
as they have already been discussed in the Triptidwipa should 
be properly studied. 

39. Since ample mention has been made of them in the 
Triptidwipa [Sect. vii. ante], the reader is referred to it. For 
the purpose of clearing the intellect, they are fit to be re-intro 
duced here to ascertain their drift. 

* He enjoys the blissfulness of heaven quite disinterestedly 
without expressing any wish or longing for it, but as the witness 
ing intelligence prevading everywhere. This is the purport of the 
Sruti text. 


40. Prior to knowledge, a theosophist had to perform 
various works either essential to present or future happiness, 
or the purpose of emancipation. 

41. But subsequ-nt to gnosis, he has nothing proper to 
do, [no harm can befall him if anything is left undone], for 
the knowledge of proper and improper has left him, and that 
produces satiety. 

42. Ignorant persons full of grief are actuated by desire, 
and act as they are influenced by it. Let them continue 
their everyday practice in connection with their present rela 
tionship with son etc. ; but as "I am full of Supreme bliss, 
I have no desire left that can make me conform to this or that 

43. Let those desirous of knowledge perform works for 
the benefit of the future life, but since "I am all the abodes," 
why am I to undertake works and how practice them? 

44- Lt- t professors qualified in them, explain the sacred 
writings, or give instructions to the Vedas, but "I am action- 
less," therefore not so qualified. 

45- "I am the intelligence desirous neither of sleeping, 
begging, bathing, etc., nor of doing them, and if they are 
attributed to me by a spectator what harm can it do me ? 

46. Just as the seeds of the Abrus precatorious piled 
in a spot mistaken by monkeys for fire cannot burn, so the 
attribution of ordinary worldly practices cannot make me do 

47. Let the ignorant betake to hearing, I know the 
reality, self, what necessity is there for me to hear? Let 
those infested with doubts have recourse to consideration, 
but as I am free from them why I am to practice considera 
tion ? 

48. Let persons holding contrary ideas undertake pro 
found contemplation or deep and repeated thinking. I never 
mistake the physical body for self, consequently that is not 
necessary for me. 


49. Force of eternal practice as the result of prior im 
pressions make me conform to the ordinary usage and say "I 
am a man," in spite of the cessation of antagonistic or conflict 
ing ideas. 

50. Exhaustion of the fractescent puts an end to practice ; 
but till actions are so destroyed that practice remains unaffect 
ed and thousands and thousands of contemplations are of no 

51. If you hold diminution of practice to be beneficial for 
promoting a desire of release, be you engaged in contempla 
tion. As I find practice causing no impediment to self-know 
ledge why then am I to contemplate ? 

52. Since I am free from mental distraction, there is no 
necessity for me to undertake profound meditation for concen 
trating the mind ; both distraction and cencentration are the 
attributes of changeable mind. 

53. "I am the eternal experience" what experience is 
distinct from me ? None whatever. Therefore what was fit 
to be done has been done, and what was fit to have, have been 
gained. This is my certain conviction. 

54. I conform neither to popular practice, not what is 
enjoined in the Shastras, nor what is distinct from both. For 
I am no agent or instrument, but as my fructescent works bid 
me do, so do I act. 

55. Or even if after having discharged what was proper 
to be done, desire of popular favor makes me conform to 
the practices enjoined in the Shastras what harm can they 
do me ? 

56. Let the body be engaged in worshipping Devas. 
in bathing, cleanliness, and begging, and the organ of 
speech in recanting the mystic Oui or in the study of the 
Vedanta : 

57- No matter, whether my intellect be employed in 
meditating Vishnu or merging into the felicity of Brahma, as 


"I am the witnessing intelligence" I do nothing nor make 
others do. 

58. A theosophist satisfied with the successful accom 
plishment of what was proper to be done, and again satisfied 
with the attainment of what was proper to have, constantly 
reflects in his mind in the following wise : 

59. I have visible cognition of the eternal self there 
fore I am blessed and blessed. The supreme ielicity of 
Biahma is plainly manifested to me, thereture i am blessed 
and blessed. 

60. Miseries of earth life touch me not, therefore I am 
blessed. I am successful in having attained my eird. The 
darkness of ignorance has left me, therefore I am blessed and 

61. I have nothing proper left to be done, therefore 
I am blessed. I have attained the attainable, theretore I am 

62. Verily I am blessed, I am blessed, my satisfaction is 
incomparable, i am blessed and blessed and twice more 

63. My virtue is excellent, excellent as it has been 
bearing many frutis, and for acquiring that virtue again 
excellent 1 am superior to all. 

64. Brahmananda contains five chapters of which the 
present is the fourth ; till the felicity produced from self- 
knowledge has arisen, it is necessary to jv .practice hearing/ 
consideration,, and profound consideratiou. 


Vishayananda or Material Happiness. 

THE present treatise has for its subject the ascertainment of 
material happiness as a part of the felicity of Brahma. What 
is it like? * It is the means by which Brahmaic felicity is 
known. On this point the Sruti says : 

2. - What is Impartite and essentially one is Brahma that 
is supreme blissfulness. Other creatures experience a trace 
only of this Brahmaic felicity." 

3. From a difference in its qualities (good, active and 
dark), modification of the mental function assumes three dif 
ferent forms, to wit: tranquil, active and ignorant. Of them, 
indifference to, or utter disregard of enjoyment, tranquility of 
mind or resignation, and generosity or uprightness etc., come 
under the tranquil modification. 

4. Desire and covetousness are the active, as folly and 
fear are the modifications of ignorance. 

5. All these modifications receive the reflection of intelli 
gence from Brahma. Moreover in the tranquil modification 
besides that reflex intelligence, the blissfulness of Brahma is 
likewise reflected. 

6. As in the Sruti: "The Supreme Self for filling each 
body with his image came to be reflected." "Like the sun etc." 
Now this comparison of Vyas is intended to express the same 
cause which precludes Jiva from being a part of Brahma, [for 
It is impartite], reduces him to the condition of the sun s re 
flection in water. 

* Just as the reflected face in mirror is a proper and adequate 
means to know the character or features of the face proper situated 
on the neck, so the mental perception of reflected felicity of Brahma 
i. e., Vishayananda is an adequate means for the cognition of the 
Brahmaic felicity manifest in the form of being intelligence and 


7. "That one Universal Self resides in the body of 
all animated beings, but like the refUction of moon in a 
tank and jar full of water, He is manifested in one form 
(Iswara) and manifold forms (Jiva)" [from a relation of asso 

8. It mav be objected that as Brahma is Tripartite, there 
fore to say that in the modifications of the good quality other 
wise called tranquil, both intelligence arid bliss are mani 
fested ; while intelligence is only discovered in the active and 
d-irk thus seeking to create a distinction is unsound. To re 
move such an apprehension the example of moon has been 
adduced : Just as the moon reflected in impure and dirty 
water is dimly seen, and in pure water clearly visible : so 
is Brahma manifested in two forms [intelligence and bliss 
and intelligence only] according to different modifications.- 

9. In the active and ignorant modifications, for the pre 
sence of impurity, the blissful portion meets with an impedi 
ment; and for a little purity, the portion of Intelligence only is 

10. Just as heat of fire is imparted even to pure water but 
not light, so in the modifications active and ignorant, intelli 
gence alane is disclosed. 

11. Just as in wood, both heat and light [of firej are deve 
loped, so in the modification tranquil of the good quality both 
bliss and intelligence are developed. 

12. How is this regulated? Depending on the nature 
of substance the above rule has been ascertained to be equal 
both in the simile and the thing elucidated in it. The 
proof ? According to personal experience, the regulalor is to 
be made out. 

13. In the active and ignorant modifications, no experi 
ence of happiness is to be found; in the tranquil variety, 
some of its modifications are seen to have more, and others 
less happiness. 

14. In desire for house, land, etc., for that desire a 


product of the active quality of the mind being a modifica 
tion of the active variety, there can be no happiness. 

15. Whether or not temporal enjoyments are productive 
of happiness, the very doubt is a productive source of pain; 
and if it be unproductive of happiness, its want of success 
increases the pain; and when that happiness meets with an 
impediment it excites anger. 

16. If the impediment be of such a nature that it is in 
capable of being removed, there follows disappointment or 
dejection ; which again, as a product of the dark quality, as 
also anger, etc., brings forth intense pain, and all hopes of 
happiness are dissipated. 

17. Acquisition of a desired object produces delight a 
modification of the tranquil variety and exceeding happiness 
is the result; but in connection with the topic of acquisition, 
there follows little happiness only. 

T 8 19. Indifference to, or utter disregard of material 
enjoyment is the cause of exceeding happiness, as has already 
been mentioned in the last section. Similarly happiness 
experienced from resignation and generosity, after the des 
truction of anger and covetousness, is due to the reflection of 
Brahmaic felicity. Regarding modifications of the mental 
function directed inwards, the blissfulness of Brahma is 
clearly reflected. 

20 21. Being, intelligence and bliss belongs to the 
nature of Brahma ; of which being alone is revealed in inani 
mate objects, clay, stone, etc., and not the other two, [intelli 
gence and bliss]. In the active and ignorant modifications 
of the mental function being intelligence both ; and in the 
tranquil being, intelligence/ bliss all the three are dis 
closed. In this way is mixed Brahma [Brahma] with this 
vast material expanse] spoken of. 

22. The unmixed Brahma is to be known only by means 
Of knowledge and mental restraint (yoga)} both of which 



have already been dwelt upon. Yoga has been treated in Sec 
tion XI. and knowledge in the two following Sections. 

23. Non-being Mnsentiency, and pain are the three 
characteristic forms of Maya ; of them non-being relates to 
things which exist not, as man s horn ; ether flowers ; and 
insentiency to inanimate objects wood, stone, etc. 

24. In the active and ignorant modifications of the mental 
function there is pain or misery. In this manner, is matter 
manifested everywhere. For an absence of distinction be 
tween Brahma and this vast material expanse in the tranquil 
modification the phrase " mixed Brahma" has been made use 
of to express this mixed condition. 

25. This being the nature of Brahma and Maya (matter) 
any qualified person (but with intellect dull) desirous of con 
templating Brahma should follow the method here pointed 
out, should abandon the non-existing part expressed by the 
word " man s horn," and meditate on the remaining Brahma 
ever always without intermission. 

26. In stone and wood, etc., name and form both are to 
be abandoned ; only being is to be thought of. In the active 
and ignorant modifications after abandoning pain, being* 
and intelligence are to be meditated upon. 

27. In the same manner being intelligence and bliss 
all three are to be mentally dwelt upon in the modification 
of the tranquil variety. And these three varieties of medita 
tion are consecutively inferior, middle and superior. 

28. Even meditating on " mixed Brahma" is the best 
for persons of dull intellect [for they are capable of fixing 
their intellect on the Impersonal method of contemplation] ; 
and this proposition of the Vcdanta has been spoken of in 
the present treatise. 

29. When the above meditation of the mixed or Personal 
\ onn of Brahma has gradually produced indifference to wordly 
enjoyments, a ml hushed the energy of the modifications of 
the mental function, then is the individual qualified to medi- 


tale on the impression of happiness which is the best of the 
three aforesaid varieties. These then are the four sorts of 

30. If it be asked whether this resting of the mental 
function on "impressional felicity" (vasanananda) is contem 
plation ? It is not. For the presence of both contemplation, 
and concentration or mental restraint, it is not contemplation. 
What is it then ? Verily it is Self-knowledge (Brahma Vidya). 
When contemplation produces mental concentration, then is 
knowledge confirmed. 

31. When knowledge of Brahma is confirmed, being/ 
intelligence and bliss are manifested in the form of One 
Impartite, and distinction is then done away with ; because the 
associates which are to create distinction have either been 
restricted or removed. 

32. And those difference-creating-associates are the tran 
quil, active and ignorant modications, as also external ob 
jects stone, wood etc. Concentration of the mind and dis 
crimination removes them. 

33. There is no distinction of knower, knowledge and 
the object to be known, when Brahma has been discovered as 
the self-manifested, secondless and unassociated Reality. 

34. The work Brahmanda contains five chapters, of which 
the present (the last) speaks of temporal happiness. Make 
your entrance into the felicity of Brahma through this door. 

35. For this Brahmaic felicity, let Siva, non-distinct from 
Vishnu, be always propitious to those who with mind pure 
and faultless take protection of him ; and save them from the 
over recurring phases of birth and death in this nether sphere 
of existence.